Needhelp's Bucks appeal

[Etienne]

I do agree with Guest55.
We can, of course, only advise on the basis of what we know. You've been very open in what you've shared, but, unlike a review panel, we don't have all the paperwork in front of us!

So suitability is a 2:1 which I think is pretty good.

Yes - if the head is as accurate with her recommendations as we think.

End of yr 3 - EXS 3a reading, EXS 3b writing, EXS 3a maths
End of yr 4 - EXS 4b+. EXS 4b+. EXS 4b+
End of yr 5 - EXS met age exp EXS met age exp EXS attained upper end of age exp
End of yr 6 predict - EXS (100-110) EXS. EXS (111-120)

Ideally, one would like to see the equivalent of "well-above average" or "significantly above expectations" from Y3 onwards, and 111-120 or GDS for Y6 predictions.

And then a nice bit in the additional info section saying, essentially, he is a nice kid to have at the school.

Really good to hear - but sadly, not a criterion for reviews or appeals!

To me (having never seen this scoring system before) he looks like he is doing very nicely academically, but is nothing particularly amazing. Is that a fair understanding of it?
I don't think this stacks up to a strong case on review. Do you think I am being too pessimistic, or just realistic?

I don't think anyone should go into a review or appeal expecting to win! You're probably being realistic. On the information available so far, my guess is that the SRP might think "not sufficiently above average?".

[Needhelp]

Thank you both.

[Needhelp]

We were very fortunate to receive positive news today. I think our unusual extenuating circumstances may have been what swung it, but I guess we will never know. Thank you for all the help, especially Etienne and Guest 55. Good luck to anyone considering embarking on the next stage of the appeal process.

[Guest55]

Well done - that is good news

We try to help as best we can ... it's great to hear when it has a good outcome.

[Etienne]

The extenuating circumstances may well have helped explain the score - but there must have been something in the academic evidence to persuade the panel. Bearing in mind that the head is noted for the accuracy of her recommendations, I'm guessing that they may have given a lot of weight to the "2:1".

Many congratulations!