Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:21 am
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
I think I understand why they do this restandardisation. When they give you the first-round scores in Maths and VR, they're standardised across ALL the children with a mark range of 69 to 141. The second round scores are normalised across the same range but the catch is that it's only a subset of the children. If they kept the first-round scores then they'd effectively be giving more weight to English than they do to Maths and Verbal Reasoning.miso wrote:Got mine. English score is very low. I don’t understand how they re standardized the score? Why initial vR score 113 became 94 in the second round?
Why? Well, assuming that children who do well in Maths/VR are, on average, likely to do well in English (and the data shows this to be the case) then they're effectively removing a disproportionate amount of lower-scoring English results but still distributing the second round scores across that 69 -> 141 range in the same way. That means if there were a child who was "average" in Maths (across ALL applicants), they'd get ~100 while one who was average in English might get, say, 80 (because they're being compared against children who are more likely to be good at English). So if you compared two children who were perfect in two subjects but average in Maths or English then the one who was average in Maths would score, say, 382 while the one who was average in English would score, say, 362. Being good at English would matter more than Maths
(Yes, I've probably done more analysis of the data than is healthy but, what can I say, I like this kind of stuff! I did quite a deep dive into the DAO results to understand what they all mean and had spotted the issue with them not restandardising at round 2).
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Claremum wrote:I think a very good chance, last year 570 got in!Desperation....the letter I got said that last year the last ranking to get a place in September was 330. Is the 570 figure before OOC places have been removed?Yes, in January you can inquire about your revised rank after the OOCs are removed and other changes take place (i.e. music places and EHCP students promoted) . Please note that 570 did NOT get a place this September. It was around 520.I believe these are rankings in two system, 330 is September is after OOC, 570 got an offer was originally ranking with all OOC kids.
I know for sure because my DS was 528 (333 revised) and he didn't get a place. There were 12 children with rank 528 so some of them must have received a place (we're fairly far from the school).
That’s a big move, from 520 to 192! Was 2020 typical? Does anyone have info from earlier years on how big the movements in ranking are between Oct and final enrolment?
Our DS is ranked in the 420s snd wondering what his chances are…
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
@Qeb2019 I think E4 is also in catchment if you're friend is thinking of moving.
It may be helpful for those concerned about rankings to tell you our experience. My Dd1 was ranked 520 after the second round. After the OOC rankings were removed in January, she moved to 328.
She then got a place off the waiting list just before term started in August. So I would say to those who are around this rank, it's worth putting Latymer first on the CAF if it is genuinely your first choice, but you may not get a place. Obviously if we hadn't put Latymer first, we wouldn't have stayed on the waiting list.
It was quite stressful having to rethink in August as we were perfectly happy with our second choice local school that we'd accepted.
So those in the 400s, you have a great chance of getting in. The 500s are more of a lottery.
It may be helpful for those concerned about rankings to tell you our experience. My Dd1 was ranked 520 after the second round. After the OOC rankings were removed in January, she moved to 328.
She then got a place off the waiting list just before term started in August. So I would say to those who are around this rank, it's worth putting Latymer first on the CAF if it is genuinely your first choice, but you may not get a place. Obviously if we hadn't put Latymer first, we wouldn't have stayed on the waiting list.
It was quite stressful having to rethink in August as we were perfectly happy with our second choice local school that we'd accepted.
So those in the 400s, you have a great chance of getting in. The 500s are more of a lottery.
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
That’s really helpful, thanks Stoic.
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Also @Salvi, I think even on offers day, they offered out to around 220 (rather than 192) as there will be several people in the top 192 that haven't put Latymer first on their form.
So say your DS even moves up a conservative 150 places after OOC are removed, he'd still be in the top 300 with a great chance of getting a place.
So say your DS even moves up a conservative 150 places after OOC are removed, he'd still be in the top 300 with a great chance of getting a place.
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Thank you very much Stowic.
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Hi,
My daughter has ranked in the top 192 for Latymers. We have put it as our 3rd choice. If we don't get either of our top 2 choices, would we still get Latymers?
My daughter has ranked in the top 192 for Latymers. We have put it as our 3rd choice. If we don't get either of our top 2 choices, would we still get Latymers?
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Yes, provided she satisfies all the selection criteria of Latymer.MrsA wrote:Hi,
My daughter has ranked in the top 192 for Latymers. We have put it as our 3rd choice. If we don't get either of our top 2 choices, would we still get Latymers?
PP
-
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:04 pm
Re: Latymer Oct 2021 results and discussion
Agree! Looking at the 2021 result there is a positive correlation of 0.36 between English Standard score and the sum of Maths+VR Standard score (only using those who had their English paper marked and excluding promotedMusic and promotedPP). For those who may not know what correlation is, its a number between -1 and 1 describing the relationship between two datasets. However, I think Maths+VR would get a higher weighting unless you recalibrate them (not English as stated).datageek wrote:I think I understand why they do this restandardisation. When they give you the first-round scores in Maths and VR, they're standardised across ALL the children with a mark range of 69 to 141. The second round scores are normalised across the same range but the catch is that it's only a subset of the children. If they kept the first-round scores then they'd effectively be giving more weight to English than they do to Maths and Verbal Reasoning.miso wrote:Got mine. English score is very low. I don’t understand how they re standardized the score? Why initial vR score 113 became 94 in the second round?
Why? Well, assuming that children who do well in Maths/VR are, on average, likely to do well in English (and the data shows this to be the case) then they're effectively removing a disproportionate amount of lower-scoring English results but still distributing the second round scores across that 69 -> 141 range in the same way. That means if there were a child who was "average" in Maths (across ALL applicants), they'd get ~100 while one who was average in English might get, say, 80 (because they're being compared against children who are more likely to be good at English). So if you compared two children who were perfect in two subjects but average in Maths or English then the one who was average in Maths would score, say, 382 while the one who was average in English would score, say, 362. Being good at English would matter more than Maths
(Yes, I've probably done more analysis of the data than is healthy but, what can I say, I like this kind of stuff! I did quite a deep dive into the DAO results to understand what they all mean and had spotted the issue with them not restandardising at round 2).