Results email errors

[Pink0ddy]

For info any child who has been eligible for free school meals at any point in the previous 6 years, is classed as pupil premium. Really sorry for you and daughter. Just horrible x

This is only if you have claimed them (the free school meals) though is this correct?

[ToadMum]

For info any child who has been eligible for free school meals at any point in the previous 6 years, is classed as pupil premium. Really sorry for you and daughter. Just horrible x

This is only if you have claimed them (the free school meals) though is this correct?

If the evidence involved includes confirmation from your primary school, then yes. What does it actually say on the registration form for the test?

[Pink0ddy]

For info any child who has been eligible for free school meals at any point in the previous 6 years, is classed as pupil premium. Really sorry for you and daughter. Just horrible x

This is only if you have claimed them (the free school meals) though is this correct?

If the evidence involved includes confirmation from your primary school, then yes. What does it actually say on the registration form for the test?

Ah I’m looking from the point of view if the child wasn’t in school.

[steppemum]

PP is allocated to any child who has claimed FSM over the last 6 years.

BUT if you wanted them to consider PP in your GS application, the onus was on you to provide proof to the school before the test. So you would know if you were one of the students being considered for PP

[streathammum]

This is so difficult for everyone involved.

I wonder why the schools give chosen to qualify a specific number of children in their admissions criteria rather than using a pass mark? If the schools want to give priority to PP its much easier to use a pass mark that cuts off at roughly the right point and will include some PP children. That way the school does not have to give ranking information until it comes to making offers, rather than trying to work out ranks at the testing stage.

The school could give out scores instead of ranks and say what sort of score was needed previously to get a place while also highlighting the priority position of PP children.

[stroudydad]

This is so difficult for everyone involved.

I wonder why the schools give chosen to qualify a specific number of children in their admissions criteria rather than using a pass mark? If the schools want to give priority to PP its much easier to use a pass mark that cuts off at roughly the right point and will include some PP children. That way the school does not have to give ranking information until it comes to making offers, rather than trying to work out ranks at the testing stage.

The school could give out scores instead of ranks and say what sort of score was needed previously to get a place while also highlighting the priority position of PP children.

Didn’t see this as any help in the situation or how that would change things? The system doesn’t work fine if it’s done proper like... (perhaps I’m misunderstanding your post?!

[streathammum]

The schools are trying to apply admissions criteria before anyone has applied for the school.

It's straightforward to rank children if there is only one criterion, which is score. It becomes more complicated to rank them if you are trying to apply additional criteria such as PP.

At this stage, it is enough to provide a pass or fail outcome and, if desired, a score. You don't need to provide rank now. The problem here has occurred (it seems) because of confusion of how PP affects rank.

[cazien]

This is so difficult for everyone involved.

I wonder why the schools give chosen to qualify a specific number of children in their admissions criteria rather than using a pass mark? If the schools want to give priority to PP its much easier to use a pass mark that cuts off at roughly the right point and will include some PP children. That way the school does not have to give ranking information until it comes to making offers, rather than trying to work out ranks at the testing stage.

The school could give out scores instead of ranks and say what sort of score was needed previously to get a place while also highlighting the priority position of PP children.

When Gloucestershire did the GL test, scores were used and not ranks. In my DS's junior school alone 7 people had the same score (fortunatley they all achieved a place but it could have caused stress if some hadn't because of admission numbers). I don't think I have ever heard of children having the same rank in the test used now.
I guess, money plays a part in schools wanting PP children. If schools have a cut-off point they risk it not including PP children.

[Amber]

The schools are trying to apply admissions criteria before anyone has applied for the school.

It's straightforward to rank children if there is only one criterion, which is score. It becomes more complicated to rank them if you are trying to apply additional criteria such as PP.

At this stage, it is enough to provide a pass or fail outcome and, if desired, a score. You don't need to provide rank now. The problem here has occurred (it seems) because of confusion of how PP affects rank.

In the absence of any detail from the school concerned, it is hard to be sure that this is indeed what has happened. And the problem actually is twofold:
- the schools all have different passmarks, and there is a hierarchy in Gloucestershire which means that some schools are seen as more desirable than others;

- the schools all have different criteria for admission, with the one which has caused all the problem here having a different pupil premium policy from most of the others. Those who prioritise admission to PP qualifiers have ranked them in their top 150. Crypt only gives priority to a PP child if it ties for 150th place (can't imagine that happens all that often, can you?). So what they did this year is a mystery and will remain one until someone submits an FOI request.

When my sons did the test, we got scores not ranks. It didn't materially change anything; the issue this year is not to do with that, it is to do with incompetence and maladministration.

[Arcticfox]

On the grammar test application form there were 2 boxes, one asking if child was in receipt of free school meals, the other asking if child was pupil premium. My understanding is they get confirmation direct from county council as there wasnt a need to provide any proof.