Chance of success at review with low score

[anotherdad]

Let's focus on making sure your academic case is as strong as possible and then worry about the extenuating circumstances.

Are you within catchment or sensible distance of a school or schools your are interested in? There are sometimes people going through the review process who have no chance of obtaining a place even if they were successful and all the work and advice getting and helping with the evidence is a waste of time.

[scary mum]

Shelly60 where are you based (roughly)? Are you sure your DD will get a place if you win the review or appeal? I was just thinking that it might be a great deal of stress for nothing if you aren't sure of a place. Have you checked the previous years' allocation profiles here?

(Cross posts with anotherdad)

[Shelly60]

Oh definitely yes - her grammar school is in catchments- just 3 miles away. It’s perfect for us really. Also in catchment for another aswell. The alternative secondary isn’t great.

[Shelly60]

The downside as I see it is that with this being a new exam provider there are lots of children scoring 120.75. Also the Head said that many bright kids that expected to score 130/40 only made 120’s plus there are LOTs of out of catchment that apply. Which makes it even harder for the local children. Conversely I only have 1 state secondary option in catchment as the others are not in catchment and have not allocated in recent years.

[anotherdad]

The out of catchment children are a select group, probably tutored for the test whereas the whole-Bucks cohort is all-ability. The OOC children certainly affect the standardised scores and with their numbers seemingly on the increase, it accounts for Bucks and border children struggling to attain the 121 mark. The annoying thing is that a lot of those OOC children are either taking it as a mock or have no chance of getting a place on distance anyway, but they displace local children by pushing their score down anyway. You can be sure that anyone on 120.75 has been displaced by a "tourist" with no intention or hope of taking the place they've qualified for.

It's nothing to do with it being a new test provider.

[Shelly60]

Sorry I didn’t explain the point I made about the Head properly - he indicated the results points to a hard ( ish) test which potentially means more spaces available but I admit I didn’t understand how that results in more places.

[Wycombe Mum]

Another Dad - if lots of OOC "tourist" children are passing but do not take up their places at Bucks grammars (and they force many Bucks children below the qualifying 121), would that not mean that there would be lots of Bucks grammars with unfilled places? Or is the system designed so there is an "excess" of children achieving 121+ compared to the number of places, in order to account for those who do not take up a place?

Either way, I agree it's a real shame so many heavily-tutored OOC children are ousting Bucks children in the passing stakes (I think you should either have to be a Bucks resident or live within a certain (limited) number of miles of the Bucks border to be allowed to take the Bucks 11+).

[anotherdad]

No, he's wrong. The results are standardised so that a hard test will probably require a lower raw score to achieve a qualifying mark and an easier test would need a higher raw score. The standardisation selects the top 30% (or whatever the rate is) irrespective of the test difficulty.

It's a bit concerning the Head doesn't understand this. It's a fundamental principle of the Bucks test.

[anotherdad]

Another Dad - if lots of OOC "tourist" children are passing but do not take up their places at Bucks grammars (and they force many Bucks children below the qualifying 121), would that not mean that there would be lots of Bucks grammars with unfilled places? Or is the system designed so there is an "excess" of children achieving 121+ compared to the number of places, in order to account for those who do not take up a place?

Either way, I agree it's a real shame so many heavily-tutored OOC children are ousting Bucks children in the passing stakes (I think you should either have to be a Bucks resident or live within a certain (limited) number of miles of the Bucks border to be allowed to take the Bucks 11+).

There will be more qualifiers than spaces generally but yes, gaps will be filled with reviews and appeals.

It's unlawful to restrict entries to the test on geography, and there are genuinely looking to move into the area that would want to take the test. There is a relatively simple, lawful solution but the grammar schools don't seem to want to implement it so I can only conclude that they're happy with the current situation.

[lea2124]

Another Dad - if lots of OOC "tourist" children are passing but do not take up their places at Bucks grammars (and they force many Bucks children below the qualifying 121), would that not mean that there would be lots of Bucks grammars with unfilled places? Or is the system designed so there is an "excess" of children achieving 121+ compared to the number of places, in order to account for those who do not take up a place?

Either way, I agree it's a real shame so many heavily-tutored OOC children are ousting Bucks children in the passing stakes (I think you should either have to be a Bucks resident or live within a certain (limited) number of miles of the Bucks border to be allowed to take the Bucks 11+).

There will be more qualifiers than spaces generally but yes, gaps will be filled with reviews and appeals.

It's unlawful to restrict entries to the test on geography, and there are genuinely looking to move into the area that would want to take the test. There is a relatively simple, lawful solution but the grammar schools don't seem to want to implement it so I can only conclude that they're happy with the current situation.

Anotherdad, what is this lawful solution? Sorry I don't know enough about it but my son scored 120.75 and we are now having to go down the selection review path. It's so gutting. Thanks.