Objective National/Authority Data to Support an Appeal

[Mary Jane]

I guess it just means that I am depending upon the H/T sharing further evidence of high attainment. H/T is not unsupportive but is keen to remain distanced from the whole selection process...

If the school didn't complete any other standardised tests this academic year, I am relying on the NFER Nelson test scores reported in Summer term 2009 (Yr 5)

Thank you all for your support.
MJ

[Etienne]

Etienne, what I'd like to do is objectively demonstrate that my child scores within the top 10% of our borough (as top 11% attend Grammar Schools)

I thought this might be the case! It's not an approach I would recommend. The Code of Practice says that panels should consider alternative academic evidence. However, it's entirely a matter for their judgement what weight to give to that evidence. They may not take kindly to any attempt to push them in a particular direction. Rather than embarking on a statistical discussion, it would be much better to present a range of academic 'indicators' for your child, and hope that they are sufficiently persuasive, taken as a whole.

Even if you could demonstrate that your child scores within the top 10% of the borough in terms of SATs (with 11% qualifying for Grammar Schools), it doesn't follow that the same top 10% all qualify for grammar school. Different tests measure different things!

I never found anything that correlated precisely with the 11+, and I suspect this is going to be the view of most panels. The evidence should therefore be as impressive and as wide-ranging as possible:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/11plus ... rs.php#b12

[Mary Jane]

Okay, thanks for the advice. My intention was to include the data rather than enter into any drawn out discussion - you probably gathered that it's not my area of expertise!

It's difficult to make sense of the information available. School have always indicated that our son was performing above the level expected and his class teacher informed us that she would expect him to pass the 11+ (unsolicited, at the year 5 summer term parents eve) However, on further investigation it seems we can't objectively demonstrate anything other than upper 50% ish...

I reviewed his school reports this afternoon and found that at the end of Year 2, a comparative report table was attached to his annual school report. This table gives the more detailed breakdown of the sublevels a/b/c and states whole school and national figures for comparison purposes. There is no source named on the report but it stongly suggests that the data is out there!

I guess my question to H/T might be, on what basis did the class teacher make her judgement and what if anything other than the estimated higher level 5 SATs grades could she offer us as evidence...

MJ

[Rose petal]

Mary Jane,

Have you asked the school for CATs scores. I didn't think that my DD had done them, I asked on the off change to find they had done them at the start of year 5.

[Mary Jane]

I need to check with school after the Easter break.
Thanks for the tip.
MJ

[Rose petal]

Mary Jane - Our H/T included the A's indicating higher level 5 scores when confirming estimated grades for internal review so I assumed they were recognised indicators...

Does this mean you do have something from the school to evidence that you DC is expected to get 5As, if you do have this rather than just 5s doesn't it mean you have demonstrated that your DC is working at upper level 5 rather than within level 5.

Isn't any level given going to be a teacher assessment at this point as they have not yet taken the SATs anyway.

[chad]

If you can get a letter on headed paper saying that your child is already working at 5a or have the higher 'sub levels' included in the predicted Sats scores then it provides more clarification of ability than just 'level 5'.

[Amber]

Yes, the SATS were developed as indicators of school performance, not pupil performance. The required level for year 6 was meant to be 4, but as in all things, once one school started aiming for 5, then they all did, and it is seen now as a badge of intelligence. It was not intended thus but now 4 is not perceived as good enough, mostly by parents but also schools, responding to the horrors of the league tables. So many children spend much of years 5 and 6 practising for the SATS, often doing little else in the run-up, with extra lessons laid on for borderline cases. Once children get to secondary school, many parents are shocked to see their child apparently sticking on level 5 for a good few terms; the levels are higher in actual terms once the 'secondary' level 5s come in, and secondary teachers are well aware of the artificiality of some of these high scores.

None of this is directly helpful to MJ, but it does help to explain why SATs are such an unreliable indicator of intelligence, and maybe (though I don't know your area) why high predictions aren't enough to win a GS appeal.

[Mary Jane]

Dear all,

Yes, I do have a letter from H/T confirming level 5a's. However, I wanted to try and gauge how significant this was. If 50+% of year 6's score the same then it doesn't really illustrate much

MJ