Being young doesn't help at 11+ appeal stage
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:10 pm
Hi everyone.
We have just had a 12+ appeal for a none-existent grammar school place. Our Dd was born at the end of August and failed her 11+ - she got 118.
But when we came out of the appeal we got chatting to the LEA rep (a former HT of 25 years) and he said that in his opinion our Dd failed her 11+ appeal because she was so young!. He said that younger children get a couple of points added for the actual result. But that when it comes to the appeals, they are at a disadvantage. He kept on mentioning "means", but I wasn't sure what he was going on about. In effect, he said that at the appeals process, our daughter had a score of 118 and was born at the end of August, but according to this "means" adjustment, if she had got 118 and was born in Sept she would have gained 6 marks, and they would have passed her! I really don't know what to believe, after going through 3-4 years of appeals!
Sorry - don't think this post will help anyone - just make us even more confused!
We have just had a 12+ appeal for a none-existent grammar school place. Our Dd was born at the end of August and failed her 11+ - she got 118.
But when we came out of the appeal we got chatting to the LEA rep (a former HT of 25 years) and he said that in his opinion our Dd failed her 11+ appeal because she was so young!. He said that younger children get a couple of points added for the actual result. But that when it comes to the appeals, they are at a disadvantage. He kept on mentioning "means", but I wasn't sure what he was going on about. In effect, he said that at the appeals process, our daughter had a score of 118 and was born at the end of August, but according to this "means" adjustment, if she had got 118 and was born in Sept she would have gained 6 marks, and they would have passed her! I really don't know what to believe, after going through 3-4 years of appeals!
Sorry - don't think this post will help anyone - just make us even more confused!