Thanks.
I think they probably turned down the review because Writing is not predicted to be at GDS ("greater depth"), and ideally the CAT score would have been a bit higher.
Unfortunately it is not possible to challenge the panel's judgement.
However, I do think the review
process can be questioned on the following grounds.
Moderation: What academic evidence would have been acceptable? What objective criteria were being used?
Section B7: It is not possible to make a direct comparison between CAT and STTS, so why does the review panel make this direct comparison?
The CAT score is equivalent to the top 10% of the population - if this is not grammar school standard, what CAT score
was required? What objective criterion was being used?
And why is there no comment on the strength of the rest of the academic evidence? Why is it being completely ignored in section B7?
Section C8: Why has the right-hand column not been completed? Why is there no assessment of the strength of the extenuating circumstances?
Conclusion 1: By what objective criteria did the panel arrive at this conclusion? If there were no objective criteria, how could the review process be consistent?
In addition to the very specific points above, you could use some of the other arguments in D4 of
How to appeal for a Bucks GS place 2018.
See D11 for advice on the rest of your case.
With a score of 120 you really must appeal - but I'm not saying it will be easy.
How has your child progressed in Writing since October? Ideally you would have evidence of GDS by May.
You will also need some good reasons for wanting a place at the school in question:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... -school#c2See example of what you could write about the review in D11 of
How to appeal for a Bucks GS place 2018.
The rest of your case should comprise:
1. academic ability (one-third)
2. extenuating circumstances, if significant (one-third)
3. reasons for wanting a place (one-third)
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... school#a43