2011 Results - Compilation Table (GL Assessment)

Eleven Plus (11+) in Gloucestershire (Glos)

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

Tolstoy
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:25 pm

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by Tolstoy »

Agree with that. More people may be inclined to give info if names are left out.
mitasol
Posts: 2757
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:59 am

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by mitasol »

Due to the level of concern about names I have removed the identifying column.

I'm willing to add birth months and/or reinstate names with the agreement of the member - please post or PM me.
muddywaters
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:28 pm

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by muddywaters »

It's done it's dusted. I wouldn't want to add date of birth months as the results are standardized and this is already determined in score. Thank you BJOD for original posting of results- I was happy to have names on there but will not be adding to any other data.

Thanks for all the help on here but need to get on with our lives now methinks!!! :? :wink:
mitasol
Posts: 2757
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:59 am

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by mitasol »

I agree with you, adding the birth month without a raw score is not particularly enlightening but the names didn't add anything to the information and several people had asked for their data to be removed.
Amber
Posts: 8058
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:59 am

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by Amber »

Yes I actually asked not be identified but still was so glad to see that go. I am happy to send my son's remaining scores if it will definitely be anonymous - including birth month and allocated school when we get it if it will be of help.
Tolstoy
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:25 pm

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by Tolstoy »

mitasol wrote:I agree with you, adding the birth month without a raw score is not particularly enlightening but the names didn't add anything to the information and several people had asked for their data to be removed.
Actually I disagree. There is such a marked discrepancy between the STRS scores and the Pates rankings that birth months would help parents make sense of it. Raw scores are the same for all so don't really help.
aargh
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:00 pm

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by aargh »

Tolstoy wrote:There is such a marked discrepancy between the STRS scores and the Pates rankings
For your Pates ranking the cohort includes girls and boys. That gives the discrepancy. E.g. several DDs my DD knows are in top 120 for SHS but not in top 120 for Pates.
Tolstoy
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:25 pm

Re: 2011 Results - Compilation Table

Post by Tolstoy »

I am aware the girls are making a difference but that alone won't account for these discrepancies. Two boys getting the same raw score both born in September should when you take out the girls have the same standardised score for STRS as you are removing the same variant? Therefore IMHO it can only be down to the birth month.

STRS don't use rankings so can't be compared to the SHS situation.
Locked
11 Plus Mocks - Practise the real exam experience - Book Now