Hello

Firstly thank you for all the great information on this site it is much appreciated. I am new to the 11plus and wondered if anyone could give me any advice please.

My child achieved 120 (117.62 verbal, 123.51 numerical, 122.95 non-verbal) in the 11plus and we then went to selection review which we also failed. I am thinking of appealing this decision but appreciate that this will be very difficult. My problem is I am struggling to find something to prove the review was not FCO & I understand this is the first hurdle we need to try and get over. Child was given a 2-1 by H/T and strong recommendation, H/T also taught them before becoming head so knew them very well.
Reading age over 2 years above age.
KS1 3c reading, 2a writing & 3c maths.
End Year 3 GDS for all
End Year 4 & 5 EXS for all - I guess this is not helping but believe this is when schools started their own system for assessment?
Predicted end Year 6 Reading 111-120, Writing working at GDS, Maths 111-120.
I have also spoken to year teacher who states child is on target to reach these predictions and child has been GDS for recent maths tests undertaken in school.

Selection review form stated "Taking account of the Y2-5 progress & Y5 rept & HT comments re Y5 panel felt predicted performance was optimistic. Panel felt STTS accurately reflected the students ability". Just as an added point, it appears not many passed through selection review at child's school this year whereas last year many did. Also speaking to a another parent the "Optimistic" comment also appeared on their failed review.

Sorry to give so much info but just wondered if you could see anything useful in there.

Thank you for taking your time to look at my post.

Welcome to Appeals!

So sorry to hear that you were unsuccessful with a score of 120.

There are a number of matters you could raise with regard to FCO. See D4:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=53659

You could also query whether the admission authority has given any satisfactory explanation why the review process was FCO.
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=53659&p=658826#p658826

Some of these points could be raised during the appeal, but probably not with regard to FCO.

If you would like to scan and send me a copy of the clerk's notes, I will have a look and see if there are any further points:
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=9907&p=108023#p108023

_________________
Etienne

Thank you so much Etienne, I have sent the copies as requested.

I forgot to say, as you will see from the forms, the case also went to moderators I am guessing this may make it even harder to succeed?

I don't think so. It's not as if the moderators were independent.

Also the fact that it went to moderation underlines just how borderline this case was (120, 2:1).

Technically, of course, they could turn down the review because of no extenuating circumstances. This would seem harsh with a score of 120.
I would be very surprised if everyone who got through a review with 120 did have exceptional extenuating circumstances, which would raise questions about consistency. See D4 (v):
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=53659

I can't see anything wrong with the headteacher's comments if the panel are referring to the Y5 report.
However, I'm not entirely sure what the clerk's notes say. I can read "HT comments", the next word is chopped off by the scanner, and the next bit could be "Y6" or "Y5". Could they be referring to the head's comment on the review form completed in the autumn of Y6?
Would you like to send me the headteacher review form? - preferably all of it, because I can't yet see why they would turn down the review on academic grounds.

Unfortunately we cannot challenge the panel's judgement, only the process.
They say the head is being optimistic, which they are entitled to do, but it's not yet clear to me what criteria were being used.

_________________
Etienne

Thank you Etienne

I have sent you the HT review form and a better copy of the clerk's notes (sorry).

I had been thinking the same about the extenuating circumstances, is this the sort of question I could put to the panel?

Thank you

Yes.
We hear that over 100 cases succeeded at review with a score of 120. (The exact figure will probably be in the appeal case papers.)
The question is: "Can the presenting officer give an absolute assurance on behalf of the admission authority that every one of those cases had exceptional circumstances?"

It seems highly improbable.

You could point out that you know of a case that succeeded where the score was only 112, and there were absolutely no extenuating circumstances.
Don't worry - you won't be asked for the name, because at an appeal it would not be permitted to identify other children. For your information, though, the case is mentioned here:
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=52713&p=654052&hilit=extenuating+review#p654052
This is the case I had especially in mind when I pointed out in D4(v):
I would read out to the panel what the LA's guidance says about exceptional circumstances, and ask them what evidence there is that it has been implemented consistently when a review can succeed with 112 and no extenuating circumstances.

Thanks. The CAT scores are lower than one would like to see - but the clerk's notes don't even mention them!

The main problem, I suspect, is that the headteacher gives the highest possible predictions ("GDS" or "111-120") for Y6, but "EXS" for Y4-Y5. Is the school really saying that your child underperformed in Y4-5, relative to Y3 & Y6, or was the headteacher thinking that "EXS" is the highest that can be given for Reading & Maths? In which case why did the school use "GDS" for all subjects in Y3?
I find the instruction at the beginning of section 3 of the review form a bit confusing. I think it implies the school can use "HNM", "EXS" and "GDS" for all subjects at KS2 (other than for predictions), but I'm really not sure.
If the school has a satisfactory explanation for what they've done, which would help your case, they ought to put it in writing for the appeal.

_________________
Etienne

Thank you for your time again Etienne,

Interesting points about the extenuating circumstances. I have done a lot more reading tonight and think I am getting a bit wiser on the FCO!

I agree that the year 4 & 5 results are going to prove a problem and have been reading up on your generic questions in section A, especially A10 (iv), regarding Assessment without levels & consistency. I am going to make an appointment with the HT and see how we go from there.

Once again you have been amazing & I can't thank you enough. You may hear from me again if that's alright

Good idea. I think it would be interesting to see if the head disputes the charge of over-optimism - and, if so, will vigorously support your appeal.

You're very welcome!

_________________
Etienne