SET result
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: SET result
has anyone got any idea about how many boys they have passed Wilson and Sutton but not Wallington? As Wallington boys sets higher marks because they don't do the second stage.
-
streathammum
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:02 pm
Re: SET result
If the Wilsons/SGS pass mark is 214, that would mean that approximately the top 32% would go through to the next stage. That's pretty consistent with previous years. On another thread someone said that 3,125 boys had registered for the SET this year. If you allow, say, 5% for no-shows, that would take you to 2,970. 32% of 2,970 is 950 - which would be slightly higher than previous years but not by much.
(There are a lot of variables in this answer, sorry. IIRC, when we were sent the results for SGS and Wilsons last year, both schools told us how many children sat the second stage and how many passed. Try not to get too hung up on this stuff - there's nothing you can do about the other children, only your own.)
(There are a lot of variables in this answer, sorry. IIRC, when we were sent the results for SGS and Wilsons last year, both schools told us how many children sat the second stage and how many passed. Try not to get too hung up on this stuff - there's nothing you can do about the other children, only your own.)
Re: SET result
Wallington pass mark was 215, Wilsons/SGS was 214 - one mark difference . Not sure if that helpsQusay02 wrote:has anyone got any idea about how many boys they have passed Wilson and Sutton but not Wallington? As Wallington boys sets higher marks because they don't do the second stage.
-
tiffinboys
- Posts: 8022
- Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm
- Location: Surrey
Re: SET result
+1streathammum wrote:Try not to get too hung up on this stuff - there's nothing you can do about the other children, only your own.)
Re: SET result
Interesting that the score for girls to get through to the next stage is lower.
Did less girls sit the SET?
Did less girls sit the SET?
Re: SET result
Moon unit wrote:Interesting that the score for girls to get through to the next stage is lower.
Did less girls sit the SET?
That has been the case for the past few years. Another reason that I can think of is the use of catchment area in both girls' schools' admission policy. That may lead to less competition among girls living in the area, thus the school know they have to pass more students, enough for them to choose the right candidates.
Re: SET result
If I remember it correctly, the headmistress of Nonsuch mentioned on the open day that they only take top 10% of the students.Bluearrow wrote:
That has been the case for the past few years. Another reason that I can think of is the use of catchment area in both girls' schools' admission policy. That may lead to less competition among girls living in the area, thus the school know they have to pass more students, enough for them to choose the right candidates.