1 - Does there have to be extenuating circumstances for a successful selection review - I'm sure if there are this adds weight to the selection review form and your case- but I am aware of others who have had success in selection review previous the year on academics alone....although these could be in a very small minority.
I agree with Tolstoy. I have long queried whether review panels apply their rule consistently in borderline cases close to 121 (or for exceptionally strong academic cases).viewtopic.php?f=12&t=41358
A12 (iii) Did Review Panels follow their own stated rules? For example, the headteachers' manual refers to a normal expectation of 'exceptional extenuating circumstances'.
How many successful reviews actually had exceptional extenuating circumstances? How was 'exceptional' defined? (This is an extraordinarily high threshold, and it seems improbable that even a majority had exceptional circumstances!)
If this rule wasn't strictly applied, how could the process have been consistent?
The lower the score, however, the more likely it is that they will
expect to see corroborated extenuating circumstances, if not exceptional
2 - DD passed the Slough Consortium 11 + exams 2 days later - should I include this in the Bucks Selection review form, both are CEM Durham type. In the guidance it mentions that this may not be tactically advisable to do so, but is this not in favour of our argument on academic ability ? I really don't know how a panel of HT on the selection review board would look at this, but in my mind it would add weight to our argument.
The "tactics" are more relevant to an appeal. I think the issue for a review is entirely to do with comparability.
Although the same provider (CEM) was used, that doesn't make the two tests comparable.
121 in Bucks was presumably designed to achieve whatever instructions were given to CEM, e.g. to qualify around 30% of candidates, plus an allowance for 'tourists' who have no intention of taking up a Bucks place.
111 in Slough is designed to ....... ? How was the standardisation done? Review panel members are very unlikely to know.
I suspect that the argument will carry no weight.