Bucks selection review - score of 119

[smallbluefish]

Hello,

I've spent today reading through the appeal guidance - thank you for such a great resource. We're going for selection review.

DS is short on academic evidence due to a schooling gap (background info sent via AppealsBox). HT is supporting with 2:1 and predictions of 111-120 on reading/maths but only EXS on writing sadly; we're waiting on WISC from EP. Our extenuating circumstances were mentioned by HT but they're long term cumulative and from what I've read in the guidance I'm very nervous about them being deemed irrelevant - I don't want them to have a negative impact on DS's review.

What I'm wondering is : if the WISC shows DS as high ability (say, 120+) then how much weight does that carry as academic proof? If it has weight, then will extenuating circumstances dilute DS's case and should I actively down-play them? As they've already been mentioned by HT I am trying to get a feel for whether it is necessary for me to expand, or at least acknowledge, them in my own letter.

I had one more specific question - DS was not tutored prior to the STT and I am wondering if it's advisable to state that explicitly? I notice it comes up in appeals sometimes but would love an opinion on whether it's academically relevant at review.

Many thanks.

[Guest55]

Welcome!

You can't prove how much tutoring so it's not relevant.

I think we'd want to see WISC in the high 120s.

[smallbluefish]

Thanks for the quick reply, that's useful. I'll get the WISC results in a couple of days, fingers crossed.

[Etienne]

Welcome!

What I'm wondering is : if the WISC shows DS as high ability (say, 120+) then how much weight does that carry as academic proof?

I'm afraid that is entirely up to your panel, but I suspect they're very focused on the progress chart from Y2 to Y6.

You could point out that you've only resorted to an EP report because you felt that in the circumstances they would need additional evidence.

only EXS on writing sadly

This is a problem.
I also think the CATs aren't quite strong enough.

DS was not tutored prior to the STT and I am wondering if it's advisable to state that explicitly?

How could you prove a negative?

will extenuating circumstances dilute DS's case and should I actively down-play them?

I'm not sure about downplaying, but they do need to be concise.

The basic facts should be listed.
Normally I would hesitate to provide a commentary. It carries no weight if you were to say (for example) "Child is extremely sensitive" - whereas if someone independent such as the headteacher writes "Child is extremely sensitive" it does carry some weight.

Having said that, I think you do need to give your reasons for the schooling gap to show that that particular decision was soundly based.

Are we missing the transfer test score?

Just my initial thoughts.

[smallbluefish]

Thank you, that's all really helpful.

STT score was 119 (like CATs, it was a spiky profile with strong maths/NVR and weaker verbal).