joan_joan appeal thread

[Amber]

In fairness to anotherdad, it was I who wondered whether it was discrimination. I wasn't proposing an adjustment, just recognition of the uphill struggle a child who had only lived in the country for a matter of weeks would have in a test like this. The only correct avenue could be appeal rather than front-end adjustment, which would be a minefield.

To be honest daveg, I am opposed to selective education and this case is to me just one more illustration of how unfair it is. I think ultimately the 11+ will be unsustainable because while it is known to perpetuate inequality, once it starts to be seen as an agent of discrimination I think it might end up in the courts. Just my personal view.

My OH failed the eleven plus many years ago and didn't have English as a first language and it wasn't spoken at home. But he had been educated in this country...just not in how to do VR. This case to me is a little different as a child just arriving in the UK would have no chance whatsoever in a test like this and is potentially in a very different position from the child of a family whose first language isn't English but which has been to school here. I am not saying I think it is desirable to introduce positive discrimination, just commenting that this looks like a potentially problematic area to me. And immigration policies ought to be consistent with education policies, health policies etc. 'Reasonable adjustments' have to be made for children with recognised special needs and I wonder if legally this is very much different.

[joan_joan]

Thanks so much for the supports I received on this forum.

So how would you propose that it be adjusted for? A substantial proportion of applicants in some cities will not speak English at home, and will have parents with varying levels of English, in somes cases (particularly mothers) essentially none. How would you propose to correct for this? A test of parental English, where the lower you score, the better? A pre-test of applicant English, ditto? That's not going to end well.

I am raising the child myself along side my full-time work, we are speaking our native language at home, my son's English was mainly picked up via the supports from the school, the county council and after school, and his own hobby on readings. His progress made so far surprised me!

I don't think there are nothing that could be corrected in the near future, but I thought that's why there is a selection review designed. The review panel needs to use their wisdom and experience to justify all the matters when deciding a case.

As I said my son could not compete with other peers with his little English knowledge at the moment, I merely believe he is talented and very enthusiastic to pick up new knowledge while I am living with him and studying with him, so I feel he is suitable to go to a grammar school but I just don't know how to convince the panel about it.

As to:

And immigration policies ought to be consistent with education policies, health policies etc. 'Reasonable adjustments' have to be made for children with recognised special needs and I wonder if legally this is very much different.

Agree!

[anotherdad]

for most children so not having English as a first language is a major handicap for the test. .

So how would you propose that it be adjusted for? A substantial proportion of applicants in some cities will not speak English at home, and will have parents with varying levels of English, in somes cases (particularly mothers) essentially none. How would you propose to correct for this? A test of parental English, where the lower you score, the better? A pre-test of applicant English, ditto? That's not going to end well.

I don't propose it be adjusted at all because as you say, it wouldn't end well. I take the view that the test is what it is and a child's first language is just one of several aspects of the process that work to the advantage of some and to the disadvantage of others.

[Sally-Anne]

A substantial proportion of applicants in some cities will not speak English at home, and will have parents with varying levels of English, in somes cases (particularly mothers) essentially none.

In appeal terms there is a very marked difference between a child who has been brought up in this country, and therefore exposed to English from a very young age (regardless of how much English is spoken within the family home) and a child who has not had that exposure until a couple of months before the 11+ test.

The former would be considered to be bilingual, the latter is ESL.

[Amber]

In appeal terms there is a very marked difference between a child who has been brought up in this country, and therefore exposed to English from a very young age (regardless of how much English is spoken within the family home) and a child who has not had that exposure until a couple of months before the 11+ test.

The former would be considered to be bilingual, the latter is ESL.

And in practice? Do you think an appeal panel would look more favourably upon the latter?

[Sally-Anne]

And in practice? Do you think an appeal panel would look more favourably upon the latter?

Possibly, but there would need to be very compelling evidence of high ability in maths, for example.

Unfortunately I think in this case it will come back to "the 11+ test is the standard for admission to a Bucks GS", and on such low scores I don't think there is any possibility of the benefit of the doubt being given.

If the scores were only a couple of marks away from 121 it would probably be a completely different matter. The panel would probably think to themselves that the child had done incredibly well - which joan_joan's son has done of course, but unfortunately the test has perhaps come too soon for him.

[joan_joan]

Unfortunately I think in this case it will come back to "the 11+ test is the standard for admission to a Bucks GS", and on such low scores I don't think there is any possibility of the benefit of the doubt being given.

If the scores were only a couple of marks away from 121 it would probably be a completely different matter. The panel would probably think to themselves that the child had done incredibly well - which joan_joan's son has done of course, but unfortunately the test has perhaps come too soon for him.

According to a stats that you posted earlier (http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... 12&t=25253" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), in the past there were more than 25% cases successful with a score 5 marks below the entry score (not just a couple of marks away!), and there were successful cases with a score below 110, although very few.

So Sally-Anne, do you think what could have been the evidence that have convinced the panel, and if you are a member of the panel, how will you judge his case and your reason for turning down?

[Sally-Anne]

According to a stats that you posted earlier (http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... 12&t=25253" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), in the past there were more than 25% cases successful with a score 5 marks below the entry score (not just a couple of marks away!), and there were successful cases with a score below 110, although very few.

So Sally-Anne, do you think what could have been the evidence that have convinced the panel,

Indeed - 3 appeals out of 87 on scores below 110. The lowest score I have ever heard of was the case of Morning Glory (on this forum) whose son has Aspergers. The paperwork that she submitted as evidence was absolutely mammoth, and totally compelling. She faced a very, very tough panel, with a really hard-line Chair.

On a personal level the lowest scoring cases I have ever been involved with were 111/111 and 109/110. In both cases there was evidence from a specialist assessor that showed the children had ability levels on the 99th percentile or above. To put that in context, in the 111/111 case the child, if put in a room of 1,000 children, would be the third brightest. Absolutely indisputable evidence of very high ability, both cases were backed up by flawless track records at school and the Head teachers gave their unreserved support.

Neither case had any extenuating circumstances, so they came down to proving academic ability. In the 111/111 case, the parent's opening line was "We realise that our case today is very much a long shot ...", and the panel all laughed. It was absolutely blindingly obvious to them that the child was suited to a grammar school.

and if you are a member of the panel, how will you judge his case and your reason for turning down?

As I said above, unfortunately I think it will come back to "the 11+ test is the standard for admission to a Bucks GS". I feel sure that a panel will commend your son for achieving as highly as he did, but they will conclude that unfortunately there is "insufficient evidence of high ability", as the phrase goes.

We are still trying to establish the absolute truth of whether a review is "compulsory", because we have seen nothing in writing to that effect. Assuming that you do still have the right to an appeal against non-qualification in front of an Independent Appeal Panel, my advice to you right now would be not to submit your case for a review. (The only time I have stuck my neck out to specifically advise anyone what to do.)

My reason for saying that is I don't feel that you have any chance of success with a review panel on such low scores, and with very little evidence. If you wait until May for an IAP hearing, your son will have had almost 6 more months to prove himself in his current school. It gives you the luxury of time to assemble your evidence, from within this country and the prior evidence from abroad, and you may be able to employ the argument of "substantial recent progress".

It would still be a mountain to climb, but this is a very unusual case and if you can prove his ability beyond all doubt, with evidence such as that I described above, anything could happen!

I think your first step though has to be a discussion with the Head about his or her view of your son's ability, based on a term's experience of him.

[joan_joan]

Thank you Sally-Anne, after reading your comments, I have to hold the tears in my eyes.

On a personal level the lowest scoring cases I have ever been involved with were 111/111 and 109/110. In both cases there was evidence from a specialist assessor that showed the children had ability levels on the 99th percentile or above. To put that in context, in the 111/111 case the child, if put in a room of 1,000 children, would be the third brightest. Absolutely indisputable evidence of very high ability, both cases were backed up by flawless track records at school and the Head teachers gave their unreserved support.

Thanks for mentioning that. I am wondering what kind of evidence has the parent put? if I am a member of panel, I will doubt why he got such a low score for the 2 tests (he is extremely bright, english/reasoning should not have been the problem). But if he has been a new arrival from aboard with English as his second language, I will be interested in finding out the possible evidence.

You seems have known a lot of his his case, are you able to provide some of his main evidence?

My reason for saying that is I don't feel that you have any chance of success with a review panel on such low scores, and with very little evidence.

I thought the fact of that my son took a VR test after such a short period and then achieved such score (such a big progress) has been the evidence.

[Sally-Anne]

Thanks for mentioning that. I am wondering what kind of evidence has the parent put?

The 110/109 case appeared on the forum, and the member's name was tkc3. You can search for her posts, and there is a summary of the case on this thread http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... 05#p293105" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Please bear in mind that much of the spadework in preparing the case was done behind the scenes, and did not appear on the forum.

The 111/111 case came to me via a friend, not through the forum, so I have to be a little careful what I post. My first reaction when I heard the scores was "no chance", but I was asked if I would take a closer look. Once I saw the school reports I changed my mind very fast indeed because it was clear that there was a huge mis-match between the child's academic track record and the 11+ result.

The initial evidence we had was from CAT tests (scores around 130+) and reading tests (as high as 140, the upper extreme), and she had been recommended as a 1:1 by the Head prior to the 11+ results being known. (That is unfortunately another disadvantage that you face - any recommendation by the Head will be made with the benefit of hindsight, which weakens its impact.) All of the child's school reports referred to high ability and achievement, rather than "hard working and such a good milk monitor".

That evidence alone was not going to win a case on such low scores though, especially two identical ones. The risk with two scores that are almost the same (not dissimilar to your own case) is that a panel might conclude that 111 represented the upper limit of the child's ability. Where the two scores are at variance, say 109/119, the 109 cannot really be said to be the limit of the child's ability.

So, we sent the child for an assessment with a specialist assessor. Not an educational psychologist, but a very experienced SEN teacher with appropriate qualifications. Her report showed that the child's abilities were extremely high in virtually every area - above the 90th percentile and in most cases, in the upper extremes of the 98th or 99th percentile.

There were a couple of small weaknesses that, whilst not affecting the child's ability to succeed academically in any way, did affect their ability to achieve highly in this particular type of test. (Those were the "extenuating circumstances", or, put more simply, the "reasons why".)

The conclusion that we asked the panel to draw was that the scores of 111/111 did not represent the limit of the child's ability, but instead they were the limit of the test's ability to assess this particular child.

I thought the fact of that my son took a VR test after such a short period and then achieved such score (such a big progress) has been the evidence.

It is an admirable achievement, but you would need to prove without any possible doubt that there is much more to come once his command of English improves, and therefore that his scores genuinely do not represent "the limit of his ability". Unfortunately you are probably not in a position to do that at the present time.

I should add the caveat here that the type of assessment that the two children above undertook would not be appropriate for your child at present. The results for several of the verbal tests would almost certainly not be valid until his fluency in English has improved somewhat, and they would distort any overall measurement of his intelligence.

It does of course test for others things, such as non-verbal and mathematical ability, working memory, etc, and evidence of very high ability in those areas would certainly help your case. Unfortunately a panel would still be looking for some reassurance on his verbal ability because it is such a crucial element of a grammar school education.

Whether you could find an Educational Psychologist who could adminster the same tests but in his native language I don't know - the question has never come up before. I assume it must be possible though, although certainly not in the time remaining for a review submission.

Please could send me a PM to let me know which country you lived in before? Thank you.