appeal advice please... (Bucks)

[rubyrubyruby]

Could I ask one more thing...

we have great cat scores (128, 130 and 135) but the nfer VR done at the same time on 2 longer tests was low (112). I have seen you mention to others that this may be the reason for a lower 11-plus test as this is clearly not his area of strength (and chimes with the dyspraxia/dyslexia stuff), but is this therefore useful to mention or should we keep mum?! DS is very articulate, had a high reading age and a great vocabulary, therefore in plain english I would say his verbal reasonaing is good, but I dont think this is quite what the VR tests test (if you see what I mean). Certainly his scores in english comprehension at school are much lower than composition (or almost anyhting else) I would value your thoughts

Rubyrubyruby

[Sally-Anne]

Hi ruby

Can you check with the school if one set of tests was done online and the others on paper? That could make a world of difference to the results. If the CATs were done online (as they often are) and NFERs on paper you can explain away the difference and also make obvious use of that information to support your case.

S-A

[rubyrubyruby]

Hi- we now have a very positive statement from the HT. Since this includes the sats and VR cats should we also include data on these in the appendices or leave it out- they are strong so I would not want any chance of them being skipped over!

Small point- the HT report is 2 sided- should we copy exactly as is (ie 2 sided) for the submission or would you do on 2 spearate sheets (as all the rest of the docs are)

sorry- just dont want any chance that his comments might not get copied to the panel as these are our key plank!

thanks

RRR

[rubyrubyruby]

Etienne/Sally/anyone else...

I wonder if you could advise on the matter of NVR being well ahead of VR in testing..I have noticed you comment on this in a number of threads as being worth mentioning at appeal, would you mind expanding on that a little- I guess if the test measures VR and my child is much better at NVR (much higher CAT scores and a history of excellence in maths/spelling but weaker in writing/broader english topics) I can see an argument that the test doesnt measure what he is good at, but is that relevant? What I am getting at is the test is the test- is it a good argument that they are still suited for GS despite weaker VR skills when that is what the test is all about?

I would really value your guidance as I am not quite sure whether this is a useful little part of our argument or something I should not be making much of (or even glossing over)

many thanks

RRR

[Sally-Anne]

Hi Ruby

It is worth a brief mention because VR and NVR are indicators of different ways of learning. A child who excels at NVR learns "visually" and they will often be stronger in subjects such as maths, sciences and geography as a result. High NVR is also often linked to high QR (Quantitative Reasoning/maths) scores.

A child who is better at VR learns verbally - through reading - and will often be stronger in English, foreign languages and history.

There is obviously a lot of crossover in most children (my own son has identical CATs scores for both VR and NVR), but some children can actually be quite extreme. I have seen children with CATs scores of 141/141 for NVR and QR, but only 110 or so for VR. Those scores would still indicate an IQ of around 130, and place them in the "gifted" range, and they would be perfectly suited to a GS, but they just learn in a different way.

That is why the Bucks test is slightly lopsided, because it does not allow every child to reveal their full ability. Bucks CC has considered adding an NVR test, but there are cost and logistical issues associated with it that have scuppered the idea so far.

Although these links are pretty heavy going at times, you may find them interesting to increase your understanding of the issues:

http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/research/ass ... -tests.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/research/ass ... -tests.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would warn against getting technical at an appeal on this topic, or attacking the system, but panels are aware that the Bucks test is not the perfect way to assess every child.

Hope that helps.

Sally-Anne

[rubyrubyruby]

many thanks for such a prompt response

much appreciated for an agonising parent!

RRR

[mrsmum]

I can't offer any advice, but can definitely empathise!

We too have strengths in maths and science and reading comprehension, but dyslexia pulls down english and writing results. To draw attention or to gloss over, that is the dilemma! Given that our lower scores for writing are shown on the HT summary I think we have to attempt to explain them away in the context of these specific learning difficulties.

Having read all there is to read on this wonderful site, our current strategy is to at least allude (gently!) to the fact that a VR test may not have allowed our DS to show his true abilities.

If you come up with a better approach, then do post it here!

Good luck (oh, and how I hate that it all seems to come down to luck in the end ....)

[cairo]

Just a thought. Does the school you want to appeal for have a specialism or a particularly strong reputation for science and/or Maths? As I understand it, Panels are interested in arguments as to why this school would particularly suit your child.

So, you could seek to make the argument (as I did in my successful appeal last year ) that the high NVR score indicates an aptitude for science/Maths, that the school has a specialism in those things and that the 11+ in your area did not allow your DC to demonstrate his true ability in those parts of the curriculum.

If the school does have such a specialism, or (say) allows all DCs to take 3 separate sciences whereas other schools don't, or (say) offers geology GCSE unlike the alternate school, you could also provide evidence of your child's interest in those areas. Is he a member of a science club for example? What does he want to be when he grows up etc?

HTH and good luck!

[Sally-Anne]

Cairo, it is good of you to offer that advice, whcih would be excellent for an over-subscription appeal.

However, I have to point out that the Bucks appeals at this stage in the year are against non-qualification, not over-subscription. The choice of school is not relevant to the appeal, only whether the child is deemed suitable for a grammar school education.

Sally-Anne

[rubyrubyruby]

Many thanks MrsMum sound like you are also wobbling over the same things as us- we didnt really want to mention the dyspraxia stuff at all as it complicates the story which we thought was quite straightforward- good scores throughout, whizzy mathmo child with good school recommendation, dead grandpa 36 hours before exams (with all that entails) so seemed clear, but it seems that once you are in the appeal lottery my understanding is that the emphasis shifts importantly from "is this a child who can pass the 11-plus" to "is this a child who is suitable for GS" with the 11-plus exam mark being only one part of that story. Since the dyslexia/dyspraxia is a key context for how to read the historic academic data it is impossible to leave it out.

I have taken the approach of "look how good this is despite....." rather than "it would be better but..." if you see what I mean. We have included a statement from the nerophysiologist and the OT but otherwise barely commented on it. The HM has helpfully commented that DS's english results have been held back a bit by this, and we got an extra statement from the english teacher to confirm strong reading and spelling despite poor writing. Let me know if you have thought of anything else- I will PM you a couple of other things we have done specific to this (anyone else is welcome to them but I dont want to drone on!)

Thanks too Cairo and Sally Anne- I was going to ask about the whole specialism thing as our local grammar is indeed a specialist science college which is the main reason we want a GS for DS given his skewed skill set. The local community college will not offer such facilities. I hear what you say Sally-Anne about this being a qualification appeal, but one cant help feel that there is some validity in commenting on what one is trying to qualify for. Is it worth a mention or should we avoid it?

In this dog day time of waiting for the appeal it feels like I cant do anything else apart from worry at all the little details, so many thanks to all of you who read and comment- it keeps my spirits up.

RRR