Bucks review. Can extenuating circumstances be undermining?
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 12:23 pm
Hello
I was wondering if anyone could advise on whether or not they thought that extenuating circumstances if not deemed significant or extreme enough could undermine decent academic evidence. My child only got 116.5 in the test. 115 in Verbal, 133 in maths and 103 in NVR. We felt this was so low we couldn’t just rely on academics alone. They were expected to pass easily by school and their tutor based on mocks and ability etc...although we did have real worries that they might have a bad day so this is not totally a surprise to us.
The evidence is quite solid. 1:2 recommendation. All GDS in all years and level 3 in Yr3. Good Cats (128/9 average in y3 and 4 but slightly dipping to 121/122 in y5). Strongest predictions for KS2. Reading age of 15.10. We have a strong if short headmasters statement of support describing them as strongly recommended, more than suited to the academic rigour of a grammar and particularly noting that verbal should have been their strongest suit. The school then suggested we also included last year report summary which is also strong describing them as highly academic, very bright, lots of potential. The issue is that there is a slightly bizarre issue that has had a real impact on the last 18 months at school. It is a fear of something that luckily won’t exist at any senior school! It is clear from their report they would have done even better day to day without the impact of this issue on focus and attitude to school. It’s not mentioned in the heads statement. It certainly has more of an impact when they are under pressure but isn’t a night before the test type thing. We have various emails to the school backing this up although much of their subsequent response was verbal.
The question is really should we just not mention it at all for fear of looking like he is not a suitable grammar candidate or we are a bit mad/grasping at straws. I have read so many of the posts on here going back years, at 116 it seems we do need to refer to something. Plus it is real - if random! Finally we are easily in catchment for 2 good options.
Many thanks for any thoughts.
I was wondering if anyone could advise on whether or not they thought that extenuating circumstances if not deemed significant or extreme enough could undermine decent academic evidence. My child only got 116.5 in the test. 115 in Verbal, 133 in maths and 103 in NVR. We felt this was so low we couldn’t just rely on academics alone. They were expected to pass easily by school and their tutor based on mocks and ability etc...although we did have real worries that they might have a bad day so this is not totally a surprise to us.
The evidence is quite solid. 1:2 recommendation. All GDS in all years and level 3 in Yr3. Good Cats (128/9 average in y3 and 4 but slightly dipping to 121/122 in y5). Strongest predictions for KS2. Reading age of 15.10. We have a strong if short headmasters statement of support describing them as strongly recommended, more than suited to the academic rigour of a grammar and particularly noting that verbal should have been their strongest suit. The school then suggested we also included last year report summary which is also strong describing them as highly academic, very bright, lots of potential. The issue is that there is a slightly bizarre issue that has had a real impact on the last 18 months at school. It is a fear of something that luckily won’t exist at any senior school! It is clear from their report they would have done even better day to day without the impact of this issue on focus and attitude to school. It’s not mentioned in the heads statement. It certainly has more of an impact when they are under pressure but isn’t a night before the test type thing. We have various emails to the school backing this up although much of their subsequent response was verbal.
The question is really should we just not mention it at all for fear of looking like he is not a suitable grammar candidate or we are a bit mad/grasping at straws. I have read so many of the posts on here going back years, at 116 it seems we do need to refer to something. Plus it is real - if random! Finally we are easily in catchment for 2 good options.
Many thanks for any thoughts.