Bucks "Order of Suitability"
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
-
bubbly
Hi
We received the paper from Bucks yesterday regarding their case, it has copies of all the papers we sent for the appeal. It also has has a order of suitability list from my son's school, out of 90 pupils in year 6, only 21 were ranked, out of which only 11 passed their 11+. Obviously this list does not have names attached to them, but it doesnt look as if my son was ranked as his 11+ score of 120 x 2 is not on the list.
I am slightly worried about this because it contradicts the head teachers recommendation, as she has given him 1:2 for attitude and ability, predicted him level 5 sats and put him in the top 25% for both maths and english. If the appeal panel question us on this, what are we supposed to say?
Thank you in advance and a very Happy New Year to Everyone.
Bubbly
We received the paper from Bucks yesterday regarding their case, it has copies of all the papers we sent for the appeal. It also has has a order of suitability list from my son's school, out of 90 pupils in year 6, only 21 were ranked, out of which only 11 passed their 11+. Obviously this list does not have names attached to them, but it doesnt look as if my son was ranked as his 11+ score of 120 x 2 is not on the list.
I am slightly worried about this because it contradicts the head teachers recommendation, as she has given him 1:2 for attitude and ability, predicted him level 5 sats and put him in the top 25% for both maths and english. If the appeal panel question us on this, what are we supposed to say?
Thank you in advance and a very Happy New Year to Everyone.
Bubbly
-
Guest55
Dear Bubbly
If there's no sign of your son's "120" in the anonymised list of actual results, then it sounds as if your son wasn't ranked originally. It could just be an administrative error, although this is unlikely.
The level 5s and top 25% are a measurement of qualities that relate to the curriculum, so one wouldn't necessarily expect consistency with 11+ scores, but whatever the head did base the original rankings on, your son seems to have proved her wrong with 2 x 120. If the "2" for suitability is a revised recommendation, then she should say so openly.
I don't think an appeal panel will necessarily expect you to provide an answer to this - the question is more likely to be put to the LA representative.
However, you deserve an explanation now, and I agree with Guest55 that you should see the head for clarification.
Regards
If there's no sign of your son's "120" in the anonymised list of actual results, then it sounds as if your son wasn't ranked originally. It could just be an administrative error, although this is unlikely.
The level 5s and top 25% are a measurement of qualities that relate to the curriculum, so one wouldn't necessarily expect consistency with 11+ scores, but whatever the head did base the original rankings on, your son seems to have proved her wrong with 2 x 120. If the "2" for suitability is a revised recommendation, then she should say so openly.
I don't think an appeal panel will necessarily expect you to provide an answer to this - the question is more likely to be put to the LA representative.
However, you deserve an explanation now, and I agree with Guest55 that you should see the head for clarification.
Regards
Etienne
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Dear Bubbly
I'm glad that Etienne popped up to answer your post - I really was mystified by what has happened to your son. Your case seemed to re-write the rule book for me.
I find it odd, to say the least, that the Head is giving a ranking of 1:2, and yet your son's score isn't on the Order of Suitability. Either he was missed off it, or the Head has revised her opinion of him radically.
Obviously you don't want to alienate the Head at this critical stage, but the following extracts from Bucks guidelines to Heads may help you. It states the following:
"Only include children on the order of suitability list who you expect will be appropriately placed in grammar schools. Panels have expressed concerns when faced with lists including high numbers of children who scored less than 110."
It then goes on to say:
Please include only children ranked as 1,2 or 3 for headteacher’s recommendation on the list, unless you have exceptional reasons for including a child other than these. Usually they will also be ranked as 1,2 or 3 for attitude, but again, exceptionally, you can chose to include children other than these.
Then, on the actual Order of Suitability form that the Heads have to complete, it goes even further (N.B. The bold type is my addition):
"Any child with a recommendation of 1, 2 or 3 must be ranked. A child with a recommendation of 1 must be ranked higher than a child with a recommendation of 2, and children ranked 3 should be ranked lowest."
According to all these rules, your son should be on the list. He must have been either missed off the list or ranked at best 4:4 - there is a huge gap between that and the 1:2 that you now have!
I would hazard a guess that there may be others out of the total of 90 who were missed off too. I would ask the Head directly how many children at the school passed the 11+. If the answer is more than 11, i.e. the passes on your list, then the Head hasn't done her job very well. With up to 90 children to rank I have some sympathy for her, but I would have expected more than 21 to be ranked as possible passes.
The absence of a ranking could be very important at Appeal, as it forms a standard part of the LEA reps opening case.
So, as Guest55 wisely says - get in to see the Head on the 3rd - INSET day or not. If the Head claims to have ranked your son, then you will need to talk to Admissions immediately to sort out the error. If she didn't rank him, you could try to press her for a written statement explaining why she didn't rank him originally, but now thinks he is very suitable for GS! Send it in to Admissions (or take it with you, if your date is less than 7 days later - takes 5 copies with you anyway).
Good luck - do come back to us if we can help further.
Oh, and Happy New Year!
Sally-Anne
I'm glad that Etienne popped up to answer your post - I really was mystified by what has happened to your son. Your case seemed to re-write the rule book for me.
I find it odd, to say the least, that the Head is giving a ranking of 1:2, and yet your son's score isn't on the Order of Suitability. Either he was missed off it, or the Head has revised her opinion of him radically.
Obviously you don't want to alienate the Head at this critical stage, but the following extracts from Bucks guidelines to Heads may help you. It states the following:
"Only include children on the order of suitability list who you expect will be appropriately placed in grammar schools. Panels have expressed concerns when faced with lists including high numbers of children who scored less than 110."
It then goes on to say:
Please include only children ranked as 1,2 or 3 for headteacher’s recommendation on the list, unless you have exceptional reasons for including a child other than these. Usually they will also be ranked as 1,2 or 3 for attitude, but again, exceptionally, you can chose to include children other than these.
Then, on the actual Order of Suitability form that the Heads have to complete, it goes even further (N.B. The bold type is my addition):
"Any child with a recommendation of 1, 2 or 3 must be ranked. A child with a recommendation of 1 must be ranked higher than a child with a recommendation of 2, and children ranked 3 should be ranked lowest."
According to all these rules, your son should be on the list. He must have been either missed off the list or ranked at best 4:4 - there is a huge gap between that and the 1:2 that you now have!
I would hazard a guess that there may be others out of the total of 90 who were missed off too. I would ask the Head directly how many children at the school passed the 11+. If the answer is more than 11, i.e. the passes on your list, then the Head hasn't done her job very well. With up to 90 children to rank I have some sympathy for her, but I would have expected more than 21 to be ranked as possible passes.
The absence of a ranking could be very important at Appeal, as it forms a standard part of the LEA reps opening case.
So, as Guest55 wisely says - get in to see the Head on the 3rd - INSET day or not. If the Head claims to have ranked your son, then you will need to talk to Admissions immediately to sort out the error. If she didn't rank him, you could try to press her for a written statement explaining why she didn't rank him originally, but now thinks he is very suitable for GS! Send it in to Admissions (or take it with you, if your date is less than 7 days later - takes 5 copies with you anyway).
Good luck - do come back to us if we can help further.
Oh, and Happy New Year!
Sally-Anne
-
Bubbly
Hi
Thank you all for your input and advise. Our school does not open until 8th January and appeal date is the 12th January.
I hope Sally Anne or Etienne can provide input regarding whether we will be at a disadvantage because our son was not ranked. Also I believe the ranking is done according to the CATs test for which our son did well in both verbal and quantitative but average overall score was low due to a low non verbal score.
This is really concerning me as I believed we had a strong case.
Bubbly
Thank you all for your input and advise. Our school does not open until 8th January and appeal date is the 12th January.
I hope Sally Anne or Etienne can provide input regarding whether we will be at a disadvantage because our son was not ranked. Also I believe the ranking is done according to the CATs test for which our son did well in both verbal and quantitative but average overall score was low due to a low non verbal score.
This is really concerning me as I believed we had a strong case.
Bubbly
Dear Bubbly
If the head really based her rankings on a single overall CAT score, I am almost speechless!
It would have made a bit more sense to use just the CAT VR score, which fits better with the format of the Bucks 11+. Even that is not advisable. The instructions to headteachers state "it is not possible to directly translate a test score in another test to the 11+". A single test is not reliable. In fact CAT results come with a warning from NFER: “a pupil’s score is only an estimate of true ability ….........”
I think you should see the head on 8th January to insist on a letter to the appeal panel, explaining why she has changed her recommendation from a 4 or a 5 to a 2. Has your son made amazing progress recently? (If so, what is the evidence?) Or did she get it wrong?
Take notes during the meeting of what is said. If the head declines to write a letter for you, then you should tell the appeal panel.
By the 8th January you should have received all the papers for your appeal, so you will have had a chance to study the complete order of suitability. It will be interesting for you to see how accurate it is overall.
If the facts are as they appear to be, and you explain everything to the panel, my feeling is that they will be sympathetic, that you will not be disadvantaged by the lack of a ranking, and that your case will be decided on the rest of the available academic evidence.
Good luck
If the head really based her rankings on a single overall CAT score, I am almost speechless!
It would have made a bit more sense to use just the CAT VR score, which fits better with the format of the Bucks 11+. Even that is not advisable. The instructions to headteachers state "it is not possible to directly translate a test score in another test to the 11+". A single test is not reliable. In fact CAT results come with a warning from NFER: “a pupil’s score is only an estimate of true ability ….........”
I think you should see the head on 8th January to insist on a letter to the appeal panel, explaining why she has changed her recommendation from a 4 or a 5 to a 2. Has your son made amazing progress recently? (If so, what is the evidence?) Or did she get it wrong?
Take notes during the meeting of what is said. If the head declines to write a letter for you, then you should tell the appeal panel.
By the 8th January you should have received all the papers for your appeal, so you will have had a chance to study the complete order of suitability. It will be interesting for you to see how accurate it is overall.
If the facts are as they appear to be, and you explain everything to the panel, my feeling is that they will be sympathetic, that you will not be disadvantaged by the lack of a ranking, and that your case will be decided on the rest of the available academic evidence.
Good luck
Etienne
-
Bubbly
Hi
Thank you Etienne for your advise, it really has been very useful. I will go and see the Head on Monday. I believe the Head has not ranked children very well, as out of a cohort of 80, 21 were ranked and only 11 passed. Is that average?
I do not want to get on the wrong side of our Head, however will definately approach her for an explanation.
Also can I mention at appeal that children were ranked according to CATs test which is not consistent with Bucks eleven plus?
Regards
Bubbly
Thank you Etienne for your advise, it really has been very useful. I will go and see the Head on Monday. I believe the Head has not ranked children very well, as out of a cohort of 80, 21 were ranked and only 11 passed. Is that average?
I do not want to get on the wrong side of our Head, however will definately approach her for an explanation.
Also can I mention at appeal that children were ranked according to CATs test which is not consistent with Bucks eleven plus?
Regards
Bubbly
Dear Bubbly
11/21 does not sound very good to me, especially when the LA have made a real effort this year to improve the reliability of headteacher rankings, and have issued lots of guidance to schools.
Feel free to tell the panel that children were ranked according to a single overall CATs test, if that is what has happened. Point out that the head hasn't even used a VR score to base her recommendations on, and hasn't followed the guidelines in the headteacher's manual which state "it is not possible to directly translate a test score in another test to the 11+".
Best wishes
11/21 does not sound very good to me, especially when the LA have made a real effort this year to improve the reliability of headteacher rankings, and have issued lots of guidance to schools.
Feel free to tell the panel that children were ranked according to a single overall CATs test, if that is what has happened. Point out that the head hasn't even used a VR score to base her recommendations on, and hasn't followed the guidelines in the headteacher's manual which state "it is not possible to directly translate a test score in another test to the 11+".
Best wishes
Etienne
Confusion over Order of Suitablity Ranking
Hi All,
I am having a real problem figuring out how to 'square' the Order of Suitablity Ranking (OSR) circle.
Our son achieved 117 and 118 in the Bucks 11+. His head encouraged us to appeal and has written a supportive summary. The relevant stats are:
Recommendation 2, Attitude 1, KS2 predictions 5,5,5 Position in year group 50 - 75% group, OSR 24th out of 28 ranked. 18 children passed
Personally I am unable to fathom how the Head can rank our son 24th, and then go on to include statements such as ' certainly would benefit from GS education' and 'will, without any doubt, rise to expectations placed upon him in a GS setting'.
If the Panel query this anomaly, how will my wife and I explain it? We face the Panel on the 5th of Jan.
I am having a real problem figuring out how to 'square' the Order of Suitablity Ranking (OSR) circle.
Our son achieved 117 and 118 in the Bucks 11+. His head encouraged us to appeal and has written a supportive summary. The relevant stats are:
Recommendation 2, Attitude 1, KS2 predictions 5,5,5 Position in year group 50 - 75% group, OSR 24th out of 28 ranked. 18 children passed
Personally I am unable to fathom how the Head can rank our son 24th, and then go on to include statements such as ' certainly would benefit from GS education' and 'will, without any doubt, rise to expectations placed upon him in a GS setting'.
If the Panel query this anomaly, how will my wife and I explain it? We face the Panel on the 5th of Jan.
-
Guest55
Are you going to be able to see the Head before your appeal?
How many are in the year group? Were those that achieved the 121 the top 18 - ie how good was the Head at predicting who would achieve the qualifying score.
The 50 -75 % worries me - the panel will struggle to understand how your child can be suitable for a GS and not be in top 25%. I say this from experience as my child was in a class well over half achieved 121+ and more than 50% achieved level 5s - the appeal panel could not understand this and challenged the LA rep on the data!!
How many are in the year group? Were those that achieved the 121 the top 18 - ie how good was the Head at predicting who would achieve the qualifying score.
The 50 -75 % worries me - the panel will struggle to understand how your child can be suitable for a GS and not be in top 25%. I say this from experience as my child was in a class well over half achieved 121+ and more than 50% achieved level 5s - the appeal panel could not understand this and challenged the LA rep on the data!!
