Guest55 wrote:
110 is nothing to do with GS suitability -
The old Bucks 11+ [VR] was pretty hopeless with levels from 3 to 5 joining Year 7. The KS2 levels tended to be more reliable than the 11+ score - there was very little correlation.
I respectfully question your reasoning, Guest55.
110 at SAT is by no means a magic number, nor did I purport it to be.
But by definition, those who are better at sitting tests will tend to get higher marks, either because they have higher intrinsic capacity, or have been coached specificallt for the test.
So the actual MARKS in one test are not releted to actual MARKS in the other: 11 plus are cohort marked whereas KS2 tests are get-the-answer-get-a-raw-mark, the conversion method is different I believe.
But those children who have a KS2 SAT mark of 100 have hit “expected progress; nationally about 75% of the children nationally achieved this in eg Maths.
So getting 100 is not equal to being in the top 30% of cohort for a grammar or the top eg 10% for a superselective.
110 plus at KS2 SATs is achieved by a smaller number of children.... perhaps 25% or so.... so do you see how BROADLY those children wth the highest marks at KS2 would
Not be surprising to have a considerable overlap with those who perform well
In the 11+??
The “syllabus” is different, the children going in are not the same (even in fully selective areas due to exam tourists), so yes they are not identical. But to state that the two scores are totally unrelated seems highly illogical.