Understanding The Results And What They Mean

[Jellybean]

Could you please help with some advice on the 'new style' results and what they mean.

The 'old style' we had our heads round and you knew
(1) if you passed,
(2) if you didn't achieve the magic 121 but we're in a reasonable appeal position (as a rule if thumb we were advised 116 and above was worth an appeal- but know this was a very rough guide and individual child and circumstances were the most important factor)
(3) grammar school was really not the best option for your child

I notice that whilst the pass mark remains at 121 - it does say the 'old test average' was 111 - whereas the 'new test average' is 100...

Is there a rough guide / indicator anyone can suggest from the results for the 'new style' - in terms of whether to accept the situation or appeal,appeal,appeal?

Also with appeals in mind... Do the breakdowns in the 3 categories given in the letter equate to an effective pass mark for each section? Is there any information on the max/min in each category?

[Sally-Anne]

I am going to be very cautious here, because clearly we are in uncharted territory.

From this thread here http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... 54#p381054" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An important implication of this is that the only score that will equate directly to previous tests is 121. No other score will equate directly, thus, for example an ‘old’ score of 110 will in future be a ‘new’ score of about 98.

None of this undermines the fact that the standardisation process puts all pupils on the same scale regardless of their chronological age at the time of testing. Even though the ‘old’ score was 110 and the new score is 98 this does not mean either score indicates the child is more or less able than the other – YOU CANNOT DIRECTLY COMPARE OLD AND NEW SCORES EXCEPT AT THE POINT OF 121.

So, an old score of 110 would be a score of 98 for the new test. For the old test it would be fair to say that, other than in a very few exceptional cases, 110 was the absolute minimum score for lodging an appeal.

The corollary of that for the new test suggests to me that the absolute minimum score for an appeal would be around 100.

Scores above 110 might equate to the 116 plus "benchmark" that we used to use as being "could be a good shot".

I'm not sure about the breakdown of the individual papers. I need to check with gurus who understand standardisation before posting more about that!

[Etienne]

I'd be surprised if appeal panel members will know what equates to the previous 116! Even if they do, I can't believe they would attach any weight to it. They are likely to see the CEM 11+ as an entirely new situation, with 121 being the only constant.

as a rule if thumb we were advised 116 and above was worth an appeal- but know this was a very rough guide and individual child and circumstances were the most important factor

Glad you added "this was a very rough guide and individual child and circumstances were the most important factor".

Statistically, with the old style 11+, you may have stood a better chance with a score of 116 and above, but whether it was worth appealing always depended on the strength of the overall case (especially academic evidence) you were able put forward. That won't change.

For appeal purposes my advice would be to focus on:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... cation#b11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Sanna]

For your information: I heard indirectly that our Bucks primary headteacher's advice for the year is to consider appeals at 115+. I do not know if this is their own guess/interpretation or based on guidance from the end of Sept headteacher briefing meeting. If it's their own interpretation then the advice needs to be put in the context of knowing that the school is extremely conservative and is anti trying to get children to qualify who may be much happier in an Upper school.

My own guess would be that part of the point of giving a test that differentiates bright children better and spreading out the standardisation range are all intended to make it easier to differentiate children who were near misses. They would probably prefer to focus on the fewer children who score close to the qualification mark and may be more generous perhaps with these near misses? Who knows.

I would suggest that this year as it's all so new if anyone is in doubt then just have a go - as there may be plenty of scope to argue cases at all kinds of scores - it's a test only done on one day, the weighting impacts different children in different ways etc etc... And as always Etienne is right - it will depend on the strength of academic evidence and your own case...