Standardisation Issues and Non-Qualification

[Ricky74]

What is the sibling benefit?

I have twins. One 'pased' comfortably, the other will end up at appeal yet ftom what I can gather the sibling argument for grammar carries no weight, unlike non grammars.

[ToadMum]

What is the sibling benefit?

I have twins. One 'pased' comfortably, the other will end up at appeal yet ftom what I can gather the sibling argument for grammar carries no weight, unlike non grammars.

(I think that) if your grammar school admits on score rank only, then it cannot give precedence to siblings. If admission is by achieving a 'pass ' score, then 'sibling' is allowed as an oversubscription criterion, along with proximity etc. Admission on score order treats each applicant as an individual, admitting according to categories above a basic pass (as in Buckinghamshire) identifies grammar schools as 'community schools for the cleverer kids', so to speak.

[anotherdad]

What is the sibling benefit?

I have twins. One 'pased' comfortably, the other will end up at appeal yet ftom what I can gather the sibling argument for grammar carries no weight, unlike non grammars.

It carries the same weight irrespective of grammar or upper schools (taking into account individual schools' stance on siblings, of course), but ToadMum is correct. Sibling rules come into play when it comes to allocation of places, and even then, it's normally for a child whose elder sibling is already at the school in question and in the case of a grammar school, only if the younger child has qualified.

I seem to recall that on the unlikely occasion where there is one place left at a school and the next two children on the list are twins (both qualified or both non-qualified), both would be admitted. It would be unfair to pass over them to the next singleton on the list!

There is no "sibling benefit" when it comes to qualification for grammar school, although I see no harm in making the point at appeal that twin A would benefit from joining twin B at the same school, but it could only be an accompanying point to strong academic evidence of suitability, not in lieu of it.

[LoveBucks]

We had applied for Raw Scores and on the comms from the BCC, the age of the child at the time of the exam was mentioned as 10.28. Have no idea how to interpret this age. Would anybody know what this means? Thanks.

[ToadMum]

We had applied for Raw Scores and on the comms from the BCC, the age of the child at the time of the exam was mentioned as 10.28. Have no idea how to interpret this age. Would anybody know what this means? Thanks.

First question - what was his / her actual chronological age on the day of the test?

[Guest55]

It looks like 10 years, 3 and a bit months - is that about right?

[kenyancowgirl]

Assumedly your child was 10 years and 103 days (or just over 14.5 weeks) old when she took the test?

edited to add crossed with Guest!

[LoveBucks]

It looks like 10 years, 3 and a bit months - is that about right?

Yes. That sounds about right. Thanks. Was a bit perplexed with the numbers added after the decimal point.