Page 1 of 3

Wilson’s Results

Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:57 pm
by nelwood
Just in case you haven’t seen Wilson’s results are now out.

1028 boys sat the second stage entrance exam
614 passed the second stage for Wilson’s

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:21 pm
by GlynisTally
Has anyone
passed Sutton, but not Wilson
or
passed Wilsons and not Sutton (if that's possible)

I believe you get enough data then at least in the past you did, to calculate rank for WCGS I'll try to do it if anyone PM's the data.

How come different number took stage 2, when the pass mark was the same for Sutton and Wilson?

Sutton 1043 candidates sat the second stage test and 861 met the required standard.
Wilson 1028 candidates sat the second stage test and 614 met the required standard.



SET pass marks posted elsewhere. Not sure if the below is official from school or if the decimal point is missing and its been rounded.

Greenshaw High School: 198
Wallington County Grammar School: 217
Sutton Grammar School: 215
Wilson's School: 215

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:24 am
by Alokp
My DS has cleared Sutton but fell short of English cut off at Wilson’s, even though total scores are ahead of cut off. What are his chances for SGS? We aren’t in the catchment.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2021 9:41 am
by Oneoftwothings
GlynisTally wrote:Has anyone
passed Sutton, but not Wilson
or
passed Wilsons and not Sutton (if that's possible)

I believe you get enough data then at least in the past you did, to calculate rank for WCGS I'll try to do it if anyone PM's the data.

How come different number took stage 2, when the pass mark was the same for Sutton and Wilson?

Sutton 1043 candidates sat the second stage test and 861 met the required standard.
Wilson 1028 candidates sat the second stage test and 614 met the required standard.



SET pass marks posted elsewhere. Not sure if the below is official from school or if the decimal point is missing and its been rounded.

Greenshaw High School: 198
Wallington County Grammar School: 217
Sutton Grammar School: 215
Wilson's School: 215
I believe SGS add an extra standardisation to reflect postcodes considered to be in a ‘deprived’ area. This from their admissions policy: “adjusted for age and deprivation (using the IDACI score for a boy’s home address)”. I don’t think Wilson’s have this, so SGS capture a few more boys each year.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2021 9:52 am
by Oneoftwothings
Alokp wrote:My DS has cleared Sutton but fell short of English cut off at Wilson’s, even though total scores are ahead of cut off. What are his chances for SGS? We aren’t in the catchment.
I suppose it depends how far ahead of cutoff... This is for Wilson’s not SGS but might give you an indication of whether the marks would have been high enough to get a place at Wilson’s had your DS passed the English threshold. If it would have, a place at SGS is pretty likely, even out of catchment.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... ng-1681517" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Worth remembering also that the second round English is worth 40% of the Wilson’s final marks, and only 30% of SGS final marks, so a low mark will pull the final score down less for SGS.

It’s all a bit of a guessing game, but I hope that’s helpful.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:17 am
by Alokp
Thank you for your response. His Maths marks are well ahead of the cutoff by 40%, but fell short if English by 5%. Appreciate your help and inputs.
Oneoftwothings wrote:
Alokp wrote:My DS has cleared Sutton but fell short of English cut off at Wilson’s, even though total scores are ahead of cut off. What are his chances for SGS? We aren’t in the catchment.
I suppose it depends how far ahead of cutoff... This is for Wilson’s not SGS but might give you an indication of whether the marks would have been high enough to get a place at Wilson’s had your DS passed the English threshold. If it would have, a place at SGS is pretty likely, even out of catchment.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... ng-1681517" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Worth remembering also that the second round English is worth 40% of the Wilson’s final marks, and only 30% of SGS final marks, so a low mark will pull the final score down less for SGS.

It’s all a bit of a guessing game, but I hope that’s helpful.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:48 am
by SJ307
My DS has met the requirement for SGS, but not Wilsons. Although his overall score for Wilsons is above the threshold, he fell short in English. I kind of expected this as English writing is not his thing, but he did very well in Maths. His overall score is 492 which is above the Wilsons threshold of 475.
Obviously he is not in the top 614 based on the above score from Wilsons, but he is in top 861 based on SGS. I presume his score at SGS would have been higher, given that they consider 60% of stage 2 English compared to 80% by Wilsons.
Based on the above facts, is it fair to think that his ranking for SGS would be somewhere close to 600, rather than 800. What are the chances for him at SGS, given that we are out of the catchment area.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 12:03 pm
by GlynisTally
You should have more details than you posted.

You have not given the SET score, or the stage 2 score so can't actually convert from Wilsons to Sutton without splitting the scores out, and recombing at a different ratio..

Others have posted the details so your Wilsons rejection email contains them..

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 12:33 pm
by sinead8422
Using the formulation, it looks like my sons Sutton score is around 285, so he might still have a chance of getting into Sutton. He got 100 for the SET score for Wilson's, 161 for maths and 219 for English. I don't know if I have calculated it correctly though.

Re: Wilson’s Results

Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:25 pm
by GlynisTally
Would make Sutton = 291.00 Wilsons = 100 + 161 + 219 = 480.00

But then you passed Wilsons, so how do you know the values?

I'm confused, safer to post the raw email info.