Ranking

[yellowdawg]

I'm interested in these queries over why a DD who was highly ranked within the top whatever PAN of a girls' school then didn't get a rank for Pates.
I have a DD in Y8 at SHS who was very strong in English, literacy etc when taking the 11+ for 2015 entry and OK with Maths but probably not the strongest at it. She ranked within the Top 120/114 (as was) for all girls' schools but received no ranking for Pates. I have a DS in Year 5 who is great at NVR, not bad with Maths but struggles massively with English and about to start the whole preparation process and I am wondering whether gs is an option for him.

My understanding of why the rankings seem to be so different for each school is
a) it depends on number of people who have shared for each school
b) in the case of Pates, it depends on how both boys and girls do

and also
c) that whilst each school runs the same CEM tests in that the questions across the two tests are identical - the weightings they apply to each section could be very different for each school to fit in with their recruitment needs e.g. if they wanted to favour science and maths, they could.

A couple of posters have seemed quite surprised that c) might be in place, but I honestly thought that this was the case. I have either been told or read it somewhere in the last 3 years since Gloucestershire changed to CEM. I have no idea where I got this from and am happy to be proved wrong - but does anyone know definitively?

[kenyancowgirl]

Certainly Warwickshire CEM went from an equal weighting for Numeracy/Verbal Reasoning/Non Verbal Reasoning to a 50% Weighting on Verbal and a 50% weighting on Numeracy/Non Verbal combined as the feeling was that NVR and Numeracy is very closely linked so it was biased towards the more mathematical kids rather than the literacy strong ones.

[Cup of tea]

I'm interested in these queries over why a DD who was highly ranked within the top whatever PAN of a girls' school then didn't get a rank for Pates.
I have a DD in Y8 at SHS who was very strong in English, literacy etc when taking the 11+ for 2015 entry and OK with Maths but probably not the strongest at it. She ranked within the Top 120/114 (as was) for all girls' schools but received no ranking for Pates. I have a DS in Year 5 who is great at NVR, not bad with Maths but struggles massively with English and about to start the whole preparation process and I am wondering whether gs is an option for him.

My understanding of why the rankings seem to be so different for each school is
a) it depends on number of people who have shared for each school
b) in the case of Pates, it depends on how both boys and girls do

and also
c) that whilst each school runs the same CEM tests in that the questions across the two tests are identical - the weightings they apply to each section could be very different for each school to fit in with their recruitment needs e.g. if they wanted to favour science and maths, they could.

A couple of posters have seemed quite surprised that c) might be in place, but I honestly thought that this was the case. I have either been told or read it somewhere in the last 3 years since Gloucestershire changed to CEM. I have no idea where I got this from and am happy to be proved wrong - but does anyone know definitively?

Yes I agree!
Last thought on the matter....what if Pates decided to set a 'pass mark' for one of the sections in the test (possibly English) Therefore a girl could have performed very highly in all other areas but if they didn't reach a minimum requirement set by the school in one particular section they are immediately discounted?

[GL2Mum]

Yes I agree!
Last thought on the matter....what if Pates decided to set a 'pass mark' for one of the sections in the test (possibly English) Therefore a girl could have performed very highly in all other areas but if they didn't reach a minimum requirement set by the school in one particular section they are immediately discounted?

But that would be the same for a boy... Pates surely just take the top 150 (regardless of sex) who meet their criteria

[Cup of tea]

But that would be the same for a boy... Pates surely just take the top 150 (regardless of sex) who meet their criteria

Yes, absolutely. Although we don't yet know the balance of boys/girls for this cohort yet do we?
The pass mark may have been applied this year only as the school could see a trend developing that was advantaging boys? It is often documented that boys are stronger at maths aged 11 (no, not in all cases, please don't shoot me down!!) The maths sections have reportedly been hard for the previous two years (and according to my daughter the English more straightforward)
If any parents have any more info from the school direct, perhaps they can set the record straight?! It's mightily mysterious

[bozemoan]

Thank you for your responses to my initial question. A further comment I made last night seems to have disappeared but basically:

The difference is not boy/girl, nor free school meals. nor age-related adjustment, nor looked-after children - all possible but not the case. Generally the stats just don't work but specifically my daughter has a (very nice) friend who is older, privately educated and "in" Pates top 150 but only 50th for Ribston.

If it helpful to share regarding strengths my daughter's is NVR and maths.

I have gleaned enough from the two other schools to be confident that the Ribston position is consistent with HSFG and Stroud.

The Pates result is the outlier (seemingly systematic as others have the same experience). The variance is huge. My daughter's position for Pates is reported below top 20%, clearly quite a shift from within the top 5%.

Either there is an error (my normal line of thinking with an anomaly) or there is a very different interpretation of the results. So far Pates haven't agreed to check the result and haven't commented how they may have varied the results interpretation - simply noting that other schools may be different.

I've asked CEM who draft the tests if there are acceptable variances in interpretation to gauge what is reasonable. If this is meant to be the gold-standard of intelligence tests there must be a permitted tolerance to any variation. They won't comment as their contract is with the school. CEM do say the school should say how they use the test on their website, which I cant find.

Can I strongly suggest if others feel as uncomfortable as I do that they contact Pates to understand any specific interpretation of the CEM that may be different to other schools. I must say If I was a governor at the school I would be concerned to know I was the outlier without a clear understanding why - this is a new test only in its third year and they seem to be taking a fair gamble based on the variables evidenced.

[Frostythesnowman]

I have to say that from what I've heard this year, I'm wondering if Pates is doing its bit to recruit from less advantaged backgrounds and weighting negatively privately educated applicants. Just a thought as I know several of excellent independent junior schools who are usually very well represented in Pates qualifiers, haven't faired very well at all this year - for the first time ever. Probably a bit contentious but it's a thought when looking at all of these inconsistencies and the implication that certain parts of the tests may have been weighted differently this year....

[steppemum]

Frosty - I am pretty sure that would be illegal unless stated in their selection criteria.

I am also not sure how they would know, as the paper is marked anonymously as a number, and they have no background details on any of the candidates.

[kenyancowgirl]

+1....that is a very unhelpful assertion Frosty...

Whilst CEM can and do change weighting (usually at the school's behest), the weighting is changed in the same way "FOR ALL CANDIDATES" - otherwise they would complaetely fall foul of the admissions rules. Unless it specifically states in their admissions criteria, if you come from a private prep, you will effectively be docked x marks, they cannot do it - and they would not be allowed to set criteria in that manner.

Possibly the prep schools have prepared their kids in the wrong way - possibly they have a slightly "duff" cohort compared with otehr years - or, to turn it on its' head - perhaps state parents are getting wiser and prepared better or perhaps the state schools had a higher than average cohort this year.

[MintTea71]

First post... I thought I'd add my DS results in case it helps with the debate on Pates entry. He was within PAN for Marling (150 places), ranked 146 (140 places) for Crypt, ranked 160 (120 places) for STR and ranked 195 for Pates (150 places). So pretty even across the 4 schools. Pates had 1200 share their results and they ranked to 200 (so very small chance we will get in there!). At the Pates open morning the Headmaster said you can't compare to other schools as they are the only Co-Ed. My DS is strong in maths (although said this was hard in the test) and NVR. Weakness is VR. In his class at school (a state comp) 1 girl was within PAN for Pates and another was ranked 169 at Pates (within PAN for the 3 girls schools), 1 boy within PAN for Pates and 1 boy ranked for 3 boys schools but not on Pates list.

His tutor always told us the weighting was 50% VR, 30% Maths and 20% NVR but no idea if that is how the schools weight the sections or not!