2013 Results Predictions
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: 2013 Results Predictions
Yet I thought more dc sat the 11+ this year than last year - maybe you know the numbers, Okanagan?
I think the AQS will be higher this year (here in East Warks). Which will make the results in October less helpful in some cases. Still not sure how a girl last year scored 299 and got to RHS when AQS was 310, and another girl got in with a score of 309.
13 girls and 13 boys went from a year group of 70 to gs this year which was a staggering amount (but gs here had increased their intake from 90 to 120). It will be interesting to see how well they do from this junior school this year (although the rest of the parents don't find out till year end in July). Last year's year 6 were a bright bunch.
Whilst I don't have a dc in year 6 this year, I'm still interested (or just plain nosey!)
I think the AQS will be higher this year (here in East Warks). Which will make the results in October less helpful in some cases. Still not sure how a girl last year scored 299 and got to RHS when AQS was 310, and another girl got in with a score of 309.
13 girls and 13 boys went from a year group of 70 to gs this year which was a staggering amount (but gs here had increased their intake from 90 to 120). It will be interesting to see how well they do from this junior school this year (although the rest of the parents don't find out till year end in July). Last year's year 6 were a bright bunch.
Whilst I don't have a dc in year 6 this year, I'm still interested (or just plain nosey!)
Re: 2013 Results Predictions
ginx - they always seem to set the official AQS the same for LSS and RHS. But that's probably really the score needed for LSS.
LSS AQS [310] Waiting List [303+] Lowest Score Offered 309
RHS AQS [310] Waiting List [298+] Lowest Score Offered 300
310 makes sense for LSS as it is one mark above the lowest offered. The only justification for 310 for RHS is to keep it the same as LSS.
Given that usually there are less girls entered for the Eastern area exam (why? e.g. 353 boys vs 332 girls in the East region last year) the true score required for RHS is probably lower. Hence they'll probably just fill extra places at RHS by offering to those with lower scores who would otherwise have gone on to the waiting list according to the AQS. Take the lowest score offered on March 1st (300) +1 as the real AQS for RHS and you'd probably be closer to the mark. Then possibly it would drop a mark or two as people got places from the top of the waiting list.
But I agree it would be more transparent, and less worrying for parents of girls who score in between the true RHS score needed and the published AQS if they just announced the true qualifying score for RHS. Giving results with a 310 was the qualifying score might put people with 300 off of applying. Whereas if they were open about it they'd still apply.
LSS AQS [310] Waiting List [303+] Lowest Score Offered 309
RHS AQS [310] Waiting List [298+] Lowest Score Offered 300
310 makes sense for LSS as it is one mark above the lowest offered. The only justification for 310 for RHS is to keep it the same as LSS.
Given that usually there are less girls entered for the Eastern area exam (why? e.g. 353 boys vs 332 girls in the East region last year) the true score required for RHS is probably lower. Hence they'll probably just fill extra places at RHS by offering to those with lower scores who would otherwise have gone on to the waiting list according to the AQS. Take the lowest score offered on March 1st (300) +1 as the real AQS for RHS and you'd probably be closer to the mark. Then possibly it would drop a mark or two as people got places from the top of the waiting list.
But I agree it would be more transparent, and less worrying for parents of girls who score in between the true RHS score needed and the published AQS if they just announced the true qualifying score for RHS. Giving results with a 310 was the qualifying score might put people with 300 off of applying. Whereas if they were open about it they'd still apply.
-
Janeymorris
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:15 pm
Re: 2013 Results Predictions
I think you might be wrong in thinking girls at RHS get in on lower scores, I think they look at children in the "borderline category" as I know 2 girls who were in inner zone catchment last year who were 1 mark out who didn't get a place. When they questioned at a later date why someone had got in with a score of 299 they were told it was because of the borderline category ie they can look at children who were ill on the day or had evidence from teacher/ doctor that there was a reason for poor score in a child who should have got a predicted high score. Apparently it was only 2 children, maybe LSS arn,t so compassionate and make everyone go to appeal.
It is also of note that when I spoke to admissions a couple of years ago to clarify areas and scores, they said that in general the top 30 ish scores usually come from inner ring so I expect changing the zones around will not effect the top level, but may effect those near to the AQS.
It is also of note that when I spoke to admissions a couple of years ago to clarify areas and scores, they said that in general the top 30 ish scores usually come from inner ring so I expect changing the zones around will not effect the top level, but may effect those near to the AQS.
