2015 takers - new national curriculum for maths and the 11 p
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: 2015 takers - new national curriculum for maths and the
Yes I believe so. The kid does soak up his maths; if he got taught it, he would likely remember it. So i reckon what he didn't know constitutes the missing elements. Ie the percentage his 125 computes to (he was 10 plus 7mths) would be roughly the percentage of the kent test 'curriculum' that his school covered.mystery wrote:Useful to know. Dio you know if your primary school just taught them the year 5 programme and absolutely nothing more?
Re: 2015 takers - new national curriculum for maths and the
If we assume that the questions he got wrong were year 6 work and above and that he got 100 percent on the year 5 related questions ( all rather big assumptions) then this approach to constructing the new kent test paper puts chikdren at risk of not getting in to the superselectives relative to children who have been taught year 6 work and the new exam us not what it was advertised to be.
Can I be cheeky and ask what his old / new nc levels were at end of year 2, 3, 4 and 5 and when you think your school fully implemented their methods of teaching the new national curriculum.
Can I be cheeky and ask what his old / new nc levels were at end of year 2, 3, 4 and 5 and when you think your school fully implemented their methods of teaching the new national curriculum.
Re: 2015 takers - new national curriculum for maths and the
I'll see what I can find and pm you in next few days. Re the above, I follow your assumptions and I guess that is what I have been thinking as well. His score was 378 (eng 117, reas 135 and maths 126, not 125 as i inaccurately remembered the other day) so probably that would put him in contention for most of the non catchment superselectives. Ironically the one he was interested in has a catchment that we live just outside. If we were that hung up on it I guess we could use this angle in an appeal, however we've pretty much decided to apply for local alternative. Tbh really not sure how we would have played it if his score was high enough to have as stab the superselective. Imho for what its worth, the system kinda works, as his maths and english are probably typical of what's been taught, but the reasoning score is a reflection on his natural aptitude and that's what made the score high enough for the SSs (generally). No?mystery wrote:If we assume that the questions he got wrong were year 6 work and above and that he got 100 percent on the year 5 related questions ( all rather big assumptions) then this approach to constructing the new kent test paper puts chikdren at risk of not getting in to the superselectives relative to children who have been taught year 6 work and the new exam us not what it was advertised to be.
Can I be cheeky and ask what his old / new nc levels were at end of year 2, 3, 4 and 5 and when you think your school fully implemented their methods of teaching the new national curriculum.
Re: 2015 takers - new national curriculum for maths and the
Yes, it's interesting to think about. We are hypothesising as we don't know what your child was taught relative to the maths paper and we don't know if he used everthing he could do in the best way in the real test .... but assuming he did, his maths score possibly did not match his reasoning ability .... but now that verbal and non-verbal are all mixed up together this is hard to see.
If you were needing a super high selective score then, yes, it looks like his reasoning score would have helped him achieve that more so than English ........ but one could also look at his results and say that perhaps the thing that could be taught (maths and English) have not been taught as well as they could have been bearing in mind how he fares in the population at large on reasoning. I don't know though if Kent designed the new test to make schools think about this comparison or not - I don't think so as our primary is gloriously oblivious to the 11 plus in every possible way until they get a load of children through it in a way they never had done before (clever class, keen parents, many tutors parental or otherwise) and then they are proud to claim some relationship between school teaching and test performance.
Thankfully, I guess even the highest kent superselective cut off score permits a dip in one paper and very high performances in two others or three high across the board.
But children can vary from their best on the day for many reasons, and can vary between papers. So if they haven't been taught enough to tackle all the maths questions they are being put at an unnecessary disadvantage.
I don't think that kent primaries can entirely ignore the grammar entrance test where maths and English is concerned as it mostly tests attainment developed through teaching and also because grammars form part of the kent system. If they all shut down one day there would be enough school places - so they don't form an alternative at the moment - a lot of chikdren have to go to them for the system to work.
If you were needing a super high selective score then, yes, it looks like his reasoning score would have helped him achieve that more so than English ........ but one could also look at his results and say that perhaps the thing that could be taught (maths and English) have not been taught as well as they could have been bearing in mind how he fares in the population at large on reasoning. I don't know though if Kent designed the new test to make schools think about this comparison or not - I don't think so as our primary is gloriously oblivious to the 11 plus in every possible way until they get a load of children through it in a way they never had done before (clever class, keen parents, many tutors parental or otherwise) and then they are proud to claim some relationship between school teaching and test performance.
Thankfully, I guess even the highest kent superselective cut off score permits a dip in one paper and very high performances in two others or three high across the board.
But children can vary from their best on the day for many reasons, and can vary between papers. So if they haven't been taught enough to tackle all the maths questions they are being put at an unnecessary disadvantage.
I don't think that kent primaries can entirely ignore the grammar entrance test where maths and English is concerned as it mostly tests attainment developed through teaching and also because grammars form part of the kent system. If they all shut down one day there would be enough school places - so they don't form an alternative at the moment - a lot of chikdren have to go to them for the system to work.
