Unsucessful Appeal Result
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Unsucessful Appeal Result
Congratulations to all those who have passed - well done. We thought we had a very strong case 116/117, Level 5 stats for all with top level for maths, Silver Junior Maths challenge award, NFER VR score puting us in 93% and extenuating circumstances of broken right shoulder (right handed child). Prior to injury all practice papers scores 75/80, 79/80, 80/80 But no....panel thought different. Any feedback welcome.
Feeling very let down.
Feeling very let down.
-
Guest55
-
Guest55
You certainly appeared to have had a strong case.Re: Unsucessful Appeal Result
Dear larches
I do sympathise, but I'm afraid I don't know enough to say whether you had a strong case, and can only guess why the panel reached the decision it did.
With scores of 116/117 they would have wanted to be satisfied about the extenuating circumstances. The usual rule of thumb is: either the child was fit to sit the test (with assistance if necessary) or not. If not, why was he/she there?
It may not apply in your case, but panels tend to be wary if the response is "We thought little Johnnie would be all right, and he begged us not to postpone the test, so we let him have his way, but of course with the benefit of hindsight ........."
Secondly, the panel may have taken a close look at the strength of the school's support ("very high academic ability", "considerable potential"?), and the overall reliability of the headteacher recommendations (what percentage of the "1"s and "2"s actually qualified?).
Practice papers carry no weight as evidence, because the same papers are used year after year, and panels cannot be sure who may have had prior knowledge of them, who marked them, etc.
The NFER score looks good, but were there any others to back it up, or was it a one-off?
What percentage of those entered for the Maths challenge received a silver award?
I don't in any way mean to disparage your case - just trying to guess some of the questions that might have been going through the mind of a hardnosed panel!
Very sorry to hear your news, and it's good of you to think of others at such a distressing time.
Regards
I do sympathise, but I'm afraid I don't know enough to say whether you had a strong case, and can only guess why the panel reached the decision it did.
With scores of 116/117 they would have wanted to be satisfied about the extenuating circumstances. The usual rule of thumb is: either the child was fit to sit the test (with assistance if necessary) or not. If not, why was he/she there?
It may not apply in your case, but panels tend to be wary if the response is "We thought little Johnnie would be all right, and he begged us not to postpone the test, so we let him have his way, but of course with the benefit of hindsight ........."
Secondly, the panel may have taken a close look at the strength of the school's support ("very high academic ability", "considerable potential"?), and the overall reliability of the headteacher recommendations (what percentage of the "1"s and "2"s actually qualified?).
Practice papers carry no weight as evidence, because the same papers are used year after year, and panels cannot be sure who may have had prior knowledge of them, who marked them, etc.
The NFER score looks good, but were there any others to back it up, or was it a one-off?
What percentage of those entered for the Maths challenge received a silver award?
I don't in any way mean to disparage your case - just trying to guess some of the questions that might have been going through the mind of a hardnosed panel!
Very sorry to hear your news, and it's good of you to think of others at such a distressing time.
Regards
Etienne