Comparing results/HT Summaries

[Frustrated2022]

Hi, I have only just come across this site and realise it may be too late.

My DS got 115 in his Bucks11+ which he was expected to pass. I will try and keep everything brief but please do ask if I have missed anything out that would be helpful.

He achieved: V 109, Math - 120, NV 125
Weighted: V 54.5, Math - 30, NV 31.25
His Headteacher's recommendation was 1:1

He has Greater depth for Reading and Mathematics from KS1 through to year 6 predicted performance of 111-120.

For Writing, he was greater depth from KS1 through to Year 5, where it dropped to expected. School still predicted he would finish at greater depth and in their summary explained his grandmother had died (very short illness of 6 months) in year 5 who he was very close to and wasn't able to see her during Covid. It also impacted on me helping during lockdown.

He also wasn't 100% on the day, which I know now, is not even looked at even though a doctor's note was submitted. However, I did make the head aware in the morning and they asked my DS if he still wanted to do it and he said yes. Again, this was confirmed in their summary.

In the summary it also mentions his performance is consistently in line or better than children in the cohort who achieved SSTS above 121. They mention his drive, motivation and excellent work ethic and finish with strongly recommending him and fully supporting the review.


We didn't get the review due to:
1) The academic evidence does not demonstrate that he would be suitable for grammar school.
2) Not qualifying in two elements and the panel noted the very low verbal score which does not indicate grammar school suitability.
3) Summary data showing the number of children from our school recommended at differing levels and the numbers that qualified in the test. (I do believe our school gave quite a few 1:1's but said we had a very strong cohort)
4) The extenuating circumstances provided does not demonstrate that the circumstances set out significantly affected the test score.
5) Guidance is given regarding being sick on the day.

We don't have CAT's but they have done SATS practice.
In Sept 21, he achieved Maths 107, Reading 109 and writing 108.
In Jan 22, he achieved Maths 110, Reading 115 and Writing 111.

My frustration comes when finding out other results/information that we cannot compare during our appeal.

1) My DS's friend (who has shared the Headteacher's summary) who got 117 (V 114, Math 118, NV 112) with a 2:2 recommendation and no extenuating circumstances. They were EXS in reading and writing through KS1 and KS2, Predicted EXS in Writing and 111-120 in Reading. In Maths, they were EXP in KS1 and GDS throughout KS2.

2) Our HT's summary for my DS was completely the same as another DS (word for word). However, they had additional information which would also have related to my DS, for example being on the gifted and talented list, one of four to represent the year in a maths challenge etc.

3) 2 other children did not achieve 121 in two areas but still got the review (one with circumstances, one without)

4) One child not achieving all three elements, not being predicted greater depth at the end of the year.

If you could give me any advice, I would really appreciate it.

Many many thanks

[mad?]

Welcome to the forum! A good place to start which provides answers to some of your questions is here . Have a look and then if you come back here with further questions I'm sure one of our experts will be able to help you.

[hermanmunster]

It might be worth having a look at this thread that Etienne has put together - scroll down to section D which I think covers your situation ie not qualified and unsuccessful review https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum ... 12&t=63177" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Frustrated2022]

Welcome to the forum! A good place to start which provides answers to some of your questions is here . Have a look and then if you come back here with further questions I'm sure one of our experts will be able to help you.

Thank you

[Frustrated2022]

It might be worth having a look at this thread that Etienne has put together - scroll down to section D which I think covers your situation ie not qualified and unsuccessful review https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum ... 12&t=63177" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you

[Etienne]

Welcome!

Thank you for setting out such a clear summary of your case.

You have some strong points to make.

In terms of possible weaknesses:
• Was it only Writing that was affected by grandmother's terminal illness? If so, why nothing else?
• Did the panel accept the school's prediction of GDS for Writing? (It should appear early on in the clerk's record.)
• You acknowledge the point about fitness on the day of the test. (You'll have to argue that the result was a 'blip'.)
• The January 2022 SATs results were not available to the SRP.
• We don't know how reliable the head's overall recommendations were. If he was over-generous, then it would have devalued a 1:1. You will get to see a copy in the appeal papers, so will find out in due course.
If you want to find out now, you could try asking the head for a copy - but it depends on your relationship with him (and some heads feel a bit threatened if the summary data does not show them in a good light!).
Or you could submit a FOI request to the LA who would have to comply.


Unfortunately an appeal will be an uphill struggle, but I think you must try.

Challenge whether the review was FCO.
See section D
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum ... 12&t=63177" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Not qualifying in two elements and the panel noted the very low verbal score which does not indicate grammar school suitability."

Ask the appeal panel to consider whether this was relevant. Surely the importance of VR is already reflected in the high weighting it is given?
If he had scored 112 (VR), 120 (maths), 140 (NVR), he would have achieved 121 in the test (grammar school suitability), and this would have been without "qualifying in two elements", and with a low VR score!

If considerations that are not relevant are introduced, does it not make the process unfair?

"The academic evidence does not demonstrate that he would be suitable for grammar school."

If a 1:1 recommendation and prediction of 111-120/GDS for Reading Writing and Maths do not indicate academic suitability, what were the academic criteria used by the SRP? If they did not have any criteria, how could the process be consistent and objective?

My frustration comes when finding out other results/information that we cannot compare during our appeal.

1) My DS's friend (who has shared the Headteacher's summary) who got 117 (V 114, Math 118, NV 112) with a 2:2 recommendation and no extenuating circumstances. They were EXS in reading and writing through KS1 and KS2, Predicted EXS in Writing and 111-120 in Reading. In Maths, they were EXP in KS1 and GDS throughout KS2.

2) Our HT's summary for my DS was completely the same as another DS (word for word). However, they had additional information which would also have related to my DS, for example being on the gifted and talented list, one of four to represent the year in a maths challenge etc.

3) 2 other children did not achieve 121 in two areas but still got the review (one with circumstances, one without)

4) One child not achieving all three elements, not being predicted greater depth at the end of the year.

You could try pointing out these apparent inconsistencies, but as you appreciate, there's no corroborating evidence for the panel to look at.

Will the headteacher help your appeal?
Could he mention the inconsistencies? (Coming from the school, it would carry more weight.)
Could he say how unhappy the school is with the SRP's decision in this case, and support your contention that the process has not been FCO?

Moving on to the second part of your appeal, could the head re-emphasise the academic case? What progress has been made since October/November? Is there any doubt about GDS in Writing?
Would he agree that performance on the day of the test was a 'blip'?


For the third part of your appeal you are going to need good reasons for wanting a place at each grammar school you are trying for:
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appea ... -school#c2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I suggest you put together your appeal, show it to the head, and ask which parts the school would be willing to support.

[Frustrated2022]

Thank you so much for your replies. Our Head is supporting us but as a school who isn’t very pro 11+.

They have given me lots more academic evidence but again I’m frustrated this wasn’t made available to us for the selection. We chased for it several times and only got our summary (along with the other children at our school) on the 28th October and I have heard that the selection reviews are done in order of being received? Do you know if this is true?

I also have the copies of the other children’s Headteacher summaries who got through (including the 2:2) but County have said due to data protection they can’t be used, even though the parents have given permission as long as I keep their names out. Do you know if this is is the case?

Once again, thank you for your time

[Frustrated2022]

Sorry me again!

I have been looking at the examples of appeal letters and am a bit confused. Do we send one letter stating that we want to challenge the fair, consistent and objective and a separate letter with academic evidence etc? Or, do we put it all in one letter?

Many thanks

[Etienne]

Sorry me again!

I have been looking at the examples of appeal letters and am a bit confused. Do we send one letter stating that we want to challenge the fair, consistent and objective and a separate letter with academic evidence etc? Or, do we put it all in one letter?

Many thanks

I'll come back to your previous questions above. To answer this one, what you'll actually be doing is filling in an online form, and you just follow the instructions. After taking your details it will ask why you think the review was not FCO, and then move on to the rest of your case. It will be a single form to which you can add attachments. (I think the number of attachments may be limited - three? - but you can get round this by (just as an example) merging the academic evidence in advance.

[Etienne]

With regard to using documents where names have been blotted out, and the owners have given permission, I could give a view, but I think it would carry infinitely more weight if you asked the ICO for an opinion and they were to raise no objection. The phone number for their advice line can be found here:
https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's an interesting point and not one that has been discussed on here before. (Invigilator reports have often been mentioned, and we know their use is permitted so long as other names have been redacted.)

A cautionary note.
Might there have been other significant factors in these cases that could have affected the outcome?
The headteacher's summary sheet is a very important document, but parents could have submitted other evidence. What you're proposing isn't 100% conclusive - someone is likely to point out that panels take their decisions based on all the evidence in front of them.
How can it be established that there was no additional evidence, such as an educational psychologist's report, if the other parents wish to remain anonymous?