Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
-
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
As far as I know, there was no significant change in the total number of Reviews heard this year - very similar to last year at 1069.Edouard wrote:I don't know how many kids got a successful selection review but I understand that the last 11+ exam (sept. 2018) in Bucks was a real "slaughter": many kids who were supposed to pass failed.
Last year there was a very large increase in the number of Reviews on high scores, (529/1069 on 116 - 120, compared to 284/695 in 2016) so I find it hard to believe that Reviews on those score points have increased dramatically this year.
Talk of "slaughter" is therefore just another one of those myths and legends that people do love to propound, often when their own child was unsuccessful. There is certainly nothing to suggest that the new test was innately harder than the old CEM test.
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
I have to disagree. I have two children close in age, one sat the CEM and one the GL. I think the CEM questions were more difficult, especially the level of vocabulary, but could be answered in a straightforward way, ie. start at number 1 and work quickly through. GL questions seemed less difficult but couldn't be answered in a straightforward way, ie. children needed strategy, technique and training
Just my opinion though!
Just my opinion though!
-
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
We can play "disagree table-tennis".Deb70 wrote:I have to disagree.
Who are two children from nearly 20,000 who took the test in those years.I have two children close in age, one sat the CEM and one the GL.
The total number of Bucks children (the opt-out and therefore less tutored part of the cohort) qualifying this year thorough the GL test was 25%, and that is exactly the same as the 2018 cohort who took CEM.
Your children may indeed have found differences, and they are, after all, different children, but you just can't draw conclusions from tiny samples.
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
No, you're quite right. As I say, it's only my opinion based on my own experience. People reading through the comments might find it helpful. I certainly found the different experiences and views on this forum very useful x
-
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
Personal opinions and experiences are always useful, but this thread shows the problems that arise when people extrapolate from those to create wider theories that have absolutely no basis in fact.Deb70 wrote:No, you're quite right. As I say, it's only my opinion based on my own experience. People reading through the comments might find it helpful. I certainly found the different experiences and views on this forum very useful x
We used to have a Sticky on the Bucks section for exactly those sorts of "myths and legends", but it gradually fell into disuse, so we unstuck it.
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
No extrapolation intended.....my sample size is only twoDeb70 wrote: Just my opinion though!
Re: Selection Review - Panel Date 23/11/2018 pm
Sally-Anne wrote: The total number of Bucks children (the opt-out and therefore less tutored part of the cohort) qualifying this year thorough the GL test was 25%, and that is exactly the same as the 2018 cohort who took CEM.
The proportion of Bucks children may have been exactly the same, but we won't know which children made into that number. Probably the ones sitting mocks every month at ****!!!