"NATIONAL AVERAGE"? 75% OBTAIN 5 OR MORE O LEVELS/60% 8+. |
|
3 |
% VARIES YEARLY ON INTAKE |
|
2 |
'CREAMING' DUE TO LOCAL GRAMMAR & INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS. RESULT OF BAD EDUCATION PLANNING BY DIOCESE & LEA. POOR DECISIONS OF MINISTER |
|
1 |
'NORMAL'SPREAD OF NON-VERBAL IQ BUT 2/3 OF INTAKE HAVE READING AGE BELOW CHRONOLOGICAL AGE |
|
5 |
1 PUPIL HONG KONG NATIONAL NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKER VERY POOR LITERACY IN ENGLISH |
|
6 |
10% COME FROM BLIND DEPT / 90% COME FROM DEAF DEPT - DUE TO NATURE OF THEIR LANGUAGE |
|
1 |
100% AVERAGE/BELOW AVERAGE. |
|
1 |
1985 INTAKE HAD 45% OF PUPILS FROM OUTSIDE CATCHMENT AREA. |
|
4 |
2 "SUPER SELECTIVE" SCHOOLS (GIRLS BOYS) CREAM OFF ABOUT 180 |
|
5 |
20% OF SCOTTISH SCHOOL PUPILS ATTAIN UNIVERSITY ENTRANCE QUALIFICATIONS. IN THIS SCHOOL 26% |
|
1 |
200+ SQ ML CATCHMENT AREA: SPARSE RURAL; SMALL URBAN; LARGE TOWN COMMUTER BELT; SPECIALIST CONCENTRATION E.G B TELECOM/HR/RESEARCH |
|
4 |
28.3% GAIN 5 OR MORE O LEVELS - 121/185 GAIN 1 "O" LEVEL OR MORE |
|
5 |
30% + ALREADY CREAMED INTO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS |
|
1 |
38% OF LAST YEAR'S FIFTH YEAR PUPILS GAINED 5 OR MORE "O" LEVELS OR GRADE 1 CSE'S |
|
5 |
40% OF INTAKE HAS READING AGE BELOW 9 YRS AT 11+ YEARS |
|
6 |
43% OF LAST YEARS 5TH YEAR GAINED 5 OR MORE `O' LEVELS |
|
1 |
5 INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS WITHIN 5 MILE RADIUS 70 ASSISTED PLACES WITHIN 1/2 A MILE |
|
2 |
50%+ PUPILS IN EACH YEAR GROUP ACHIEVE THE EQUIVALENT OF 5 OR MORE 'O' LEVEL SUCCESSES AT GRADE C OR HIGHER. (NATIONAL AVERAGE IS BELOW 20%) |
|
4 |
66 PUPILS OBTAINED 5 O LEVEL PASSES OR MORE LAST YEAR |
|
6 |
7% SELECTIVE INTAKE |
|
1 |
95% OF CATCHMENT AREA COUNCIL ESTATES |
|
6 |
A COMPLETE RANGE. I WOULD THINK A PRETTY NORMAL CURVE. SOME HAVE LANGUAGE PROBLEMS EVEN IF OF NORMAL INTELLIGENCE |
|
3 |
A FAIRLY HIGH PERCENTAGE UNDERACHIEVE THROUGH LACK OF PARENTAL AMBITION & DRIVE IN THIS 'COMFORTABLE' RURAL COMMUNITY |
|
1 |
A FAIRLY NORMAL BUT CREAMED BY INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS STOCKPORT |
|
3 |
A GUESS |
|
8 |
A GUESSTIMATE. |
|
2 |
A MIDDLE CLASS SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL CATCHMENT AREA |
|
2 |
A NEGATIVELY SKEWED INTAKE |
|
7 |
A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION WITH SLIGHTLY FEWER EXTREMELY ABLE - BUT MORE AT AVERAGE & AV PLUS |
|
3 |
A NORMAL SKEW ALTHOUGH CERTAIN YRS DO VARY CONSIDERABLY |
|
2 |
A PRETTY STIFF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION "SELECTS" A HIGH NUMBER OF CLEVER AND VERY CLEVER PUPILS |
|
6 |
A SELECTIVE GRAMMAR SCHOOL BUT WITH QUITE A WIDE ABILITY LEVEL IN TERMS OF THAT |
|
4 |
A SELECTIVE SCHOOL |
|
3 |
A SELECTIVE SCHOOL TAKING IN 30% OF THE AGE GROUP ANUALLY |
|
1 |
A TYPICAL DISTRIBUTION OWING TO VOLUNTARY AIDED STATUS OF SCHOOL DRAWING FROM WIDE CATCHMENT AREA |
|
4 |
ABOUT 60% OF OUR PUPILS ARE OF BELOW AVERAGE ABILITY AND/OR ARE UNDERACHIEVING |
|
5 |
ABOUT IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER! WHAT ARE THE NORM? WHERE IS THE INFORMATION UPON WHICH TO HAVE AN ANSWER? |
|
5 |
ABOVE AVERAGE EXAM RESULTS FOR SCHOOL WITH 40% "CREAM OFF" TO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS |
|
3 |
ABOVE AVERAGE RESULTS SUGGEST A SKEW |
|
8 |
ABOVE NATIONAL AVERAGE BUT CANNOT GIVE FIGURES |
|
8 |
ABSOLUTELY NO WAY OF TELLING |
|
1 |
ACADEMIC ABILITY & EXPECTATIONS ARE SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE. |
|
3 |
ACADEMICALLY SKEWED INTAKE - COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL DEVELOPED FROM GRAMMAR SCHOOL |
|
2 |
ACCORDING TO OUR OWN TESTS OUR YR COHORTS ARE REASONABLY AVERAGE AND ANY SKEW IN ONE YEAR TENDS TO EVEN OUT IN THE NEXT |
|
5 |
ACCURATE INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE |
|
2 |
ADMISSION TO SECONDARY SCHOOL IN THE LEA IS BASED ON SELECTIVE SYSTEM - THIS IS A MODERN SCHOOL HENCE CATEGORIES 3/4/5 APPLY |
|
1 |
AGE REFERENCING NOT SOMETHING WE DO BUT WE ARE A GRAMMAR SCHOOL - AV NO OF O LEVEL PASSES THIS SUMMER 7+ |
|
1 |
ALL BOYS MANY BEHIND WITH READING AT TRANSFER. SOME 30% OF ENTRY HAVE SAME REMEDIAL ASSISTANCE. |
|
3 |
ALL ESNS |
|
1 |
ALL PUPILS CAN READ AND WRITE AND ARE REASONABLY NUMERATE |
|
4 |
ALL PUPILS HAVE COMPLEX LEARING DIFFICULTIES AND SEVERE PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT - MANY WITH MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS OF AUTISM |
|
2 |
ALL PUPILS MORE ABLE THAN CSE GRADE 4 IN SOME SUBJECTS |
|
1 |
ALL PUPILS SEVERELY (EDUCATIONALLY) SUBNORMAL |
|
2 |
ALL PUPILS TAKE O LEVELS AVERAGING OVER 7 PER HEAD |
|
2 |
ALL PUPILS WITH MODERATE LEARNING DIFFICULTIES |
|
1 |
ALL PUPILS WITHIN TOP 30% OF THE ABILITY RANGE |
|
5 |
ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO ASSESS OBJECTIVELEY WITHOUT A MASSIVE FACT-FINDING EXERCISE |
|
4 |
ALTHOUGH A COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL THERE ARE TWO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS IN THE TOWN AND PARENTS CAN OPT IN OR OUT OF 11 PLUS SELECTION PROCEDURES |
|
2 |
ALTHOUGH A GRAMMAR SCHOOL WE TAKE FROM A WIDE RANGE OF ABILITY - FROM ABOUT 103 VRQ |
|
1 |
AN INCREASINGLY LOW ABILITY INTAKE |
|
1 |
AN INTAKE THAT IS BASICALLY CONSIDERABLY MORE ABLE THAN THE AVERAGE |
|
4 |
ANALYSIS BASED ON RESULTS OF TESTS FROM VARIOUS FEEDER PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN ONE INTAKE - THERE COULD BE SOME DIFFERENCES IN ASSESSMENT |
|
3 |
ANNUAL VARIATIONS CONSIDERABLE - GENERALIZATION IMPOSSIBLE |
|
6 |
APPROXIMATE |
|
6 |
APPROXIMATE ONLY - SOME VARIATION BETWEEN YEARS. |
|
5 |
APPROXIMATION ONLY |
|
5 |
AREA SHOWS LOWEST OVERALL ABILITY IN LONDON PARTICULARLY BOYS |
|
1 |
AS A COMPREHENSIVE SCH WE ARE IN COMPETITION WITH 4 HIGHLY SELECTIVE GRAMMAR SCHOOLS IN THE SAME DIVISION. |
|
2 |
AS A SECONDARY MODERN, WE LOSE THE TOP 33 1/3% TO SELECTIVE SCHOOLS. |
|
1 |
AS ESTIMATE BASED ON AHA TEST RESULTS AND IMPRESSION |
|
2 |
AS THIS SCHOOL TAKES TOP 30 -35% OF THE ABILITY RANGE ALL PUPILS ARE ABOVE AVERAGE |
|
4 |
ASSESSMENT TEST AT ENTRY TO EST BOY IS OF AVERAGE ABILITY |
|
1 |
AT AGE 11 TOP 35% OF ABILITY RANGE ENTER OUR SCHOOL - THROUGH ACCURACY OF SELECTION PROCEDURE IS QUESTIONABLE |
|
2 |
ATTAINMENT AT 16 YRS AVERAGES 30% OF 5TH YEAR 4 OR MORE 'O' LEVELS (OR EQU) 30% 2-4 'O' 30% UP TO 2 'O'. |
|
2 |
AVERAGE ABILITY SPREAD |
|
3 |
AVERAGE AND ABOVE |
|
2 |
AVERAGE IQ IS 110 |
|
9 |
AVERAGE NFER TEST SCORE ON ENTRY: 108 |
|
1 |
AVERAGE OF 30% OF SCHOOL POPULATION GOES TO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS |
|
1 |
BAND ON ACROSS-THE-BOARD LITERACY TESTS ADMINISTERED BY EDUC PSYCHOLOGIST TO ALL INTAKE |
|
7 |
BASED ON 1Q 110+ 100-109 90-99 82-89 81 |
|
5 |
BASED ON AH2 TEST OF NFER A=40 B=56 C=55 D=5 =156 |
|
3 |
BASED ON CAT SCENES BUT NOT FULLY REFLECTED IN ACTUAL ACHIEVEMENT |
|
4 |
BASED ON CAT TESTS |
|
5 |
BASED ON EXAM RESULTS BUT NATIONAL AVERAGE MAY NOT BE A GOOD GUIDE! |
|
2 |
BASED ON LAST 1ST YR INTAKE NFER (NON VERBAL REASONING & MATHS) SCORES TRANSLATED APPROXIMATELY INTO ABOVE CATEGORIES |
|
2 |
BASED ON LAST FIVE YEARS |
|
4 |
BASED ON MOVING HOUSE VRQS |
|
1 |
BASED ON NELSON STANDARDISED TESTS WITH 15% VARIATION |
|
4 |
BASED ON NFER NON VERBAL TESTS ( ON PRESENT 1ST YEAR) |
|
4 |
BASED ON NFER TESTING OF LAST 3 INTAKE YEAR |
|
3 |
BASED ON NFGR TEACHERS |
|
3 |
BASED ON READING AGES AT ENTRY TO SCHOOL |
|
3 |
BASED ON READING QUOTIENTS IN COUNTRYWIDE LEAVERS READING TESTS LAST YEAR. ACTUAL FIGURES THEN A 6 MONTH REDUCTION - IT SEEMS HIGH. ENGLISH RESULT |
|
5 |
BASED ON READING/VRQ TESTS ON ENTRY FOR 1 YEAR ONLY |
|
2 |
BASED ON RESULTS OF THE WIDE SPAN READING TEST USED WITH ONE YEAR GROUP (INTAKE 1985) |
|
2 |
BASED ON RICHMOND TESTING OF YEAR 1. |
|
6 |
BASED ON STANDARDISED READING SCORES |
|
2 |
BASED ON V.R. SCORES. |
|
2 |
BASIS OF ANALYSIS-READING AGES GIVEN BY DANIELS & DIACK READING TEST (12) FOR PRESENT 1ST YEAR INTAKE |
|
2 |
BECAUSE OF PASTORAL CARE WHICH IS WELL DEVELOPED WITHIN THE SCHOOL WE HAVE A RELATIVELY HIGH PERCENTAGE WHO TRANSFER FROM SPECIAL SCHOOLS. |
|
3 |
BECAUSE OF Q33 THE SCHOOLS ACADEMIC LEVEL IS WELL ABOVE AVERAGE |
|
3 |
BEHAVIOUR IN SCHOOL IS OFTEN LINKED TO PERFORMANCE |
|
1 |
BETTER THAN AVERAGE CATCHMENT - BUT HAVE AREA SPECIAL UNIT |
|
6 |
BIT THIN ON TOP |
|
4 |
BOYS SELECTED BY LOCAL COUNTY 12+ PROCEDURES RE SCHOOL (2MILES AWAY) HAS WELL KNOWN NAME AND IS OFTEN 1ST CHOICE |
|
1 |
BRIGHTER CHILDREN RETAINED IN MAINSTREAM EDUCATION |
|
1 |
BROAD AREA OF DISTRIBUTION WHEN LAST MEASURED |
|
5 |
BROAD GENERALISATION BASED ON 1YRS INTAKE (1985) BOSING READING AGE/SPELLING AGE |
|
4 |
CALCULATION BASED ON PRESENT S1 WHICH SHOWS THE EFFECT OF THE CHANGE IN THE CATCHMENT AREA. |
|
2 |
CANNOT ANSWER IN DETAIL. WE HAVE A FULL RANGE OF ABILITY FOLLOWING APPROXIMATLY A NORMAL (??????) DISTRIBUTION FROM ACADEMIC HIGH FLIERS (11 O LEV |
|
2 |
CANNOT ANSWER THIS |
|
1 |
CANNOT YET COMMENT. FIRST NON - SELECTIVE 5TH YEAR WILL LEAVE IN JULY |
|
4 |
CATCHMENT AREA ACCOUNTS FOR THIS.PROVED BY NFER TESTS ANNUALLY AND LEEDS UNIV RESEARCH - 5 YEARS AGO |
|
8 |
CATCHMENT AREA MEANS SCHOOL SKEWED TOWARDS MIDDLE CLASS/AVERAGE & ABOVE AVERAGE ABILITY PUPILS |
|
9 |
CHANGING SCHOOL POPULATION RANGE HAS BEEN INCREASING |
|
3 |
CHARACTERISTIC OF AREA. MORE EXAGGERATED THAN RURAL |
|
2 |
COGNITIVE ABILITY TEST INFORMATION |
|
4 |
COMPETITION WITH LOCAL SINGLE SEX EX-GRAMMAR SCHOOLS STILL |
|
3 |
CREAMED BY TRUST SCHOOLS TO SOME EXTENT |
|
8 |
CURVE OF DISTRIBUTION SQUED TO ABOUT A 92-93 NORM |
|
3 |
DEPENDS WHETHER CALCULATED FROM 4 Q TESTS TO SAME EXTENT OR EXAM RESULTS |
|
1 |
DESPITE BEING A SEC MOD SCHOOL MANY PARENTS OPT FOR THE FACT THAT IT IS A SMALL (IFE) & RURAL GIVING A CURIOUS SPREAD OF ABILITY |
|
1 |
DIFFICULT TO ANSWER QUESTION IN FORM GIVEN ANALYSIS ON STANDARD TESTS GIVES NORM CURVE & 5% SKEW TO RIGHT |
|
3 |
DIFFICULT TO ASSESS |
|
2 |
DIFFICULT TO ASSESS FROM YEAR TO YEAR. IN THEORY ALL PUPILS HAVE IQ +. |
|
2 |
DIFFICULT TO SAY.WE DO NOT USE TESTS |
|
5 |
DISTRIBUTION APPEARS BALANCED |
|
6 |
DISTRIBUTION WOULD BE CLOSE TO NATIONAL FIGURES |
|
1 |
DON'T KNOW IN TERMS OF ABOVE. LOWEST IQ 100+ AV ABOUT 120 |
|
3 |
DON'T KNOW NATIONAL AVERAGE/ALL PUPILS HAVE IQS OVER 100. |
|
3 |
DROPS EACH YEAR RE ORGANISATION IS DELAYED |
|
2 |
ENTRY TESTS SHOW NO IQ BELOW 105 |
|
1 |
ESTIMATED BUT BASED ON EXTERNAL EXAMS |
|
2 |
ESTIMATES BASED ON AH2/AH3 TESTS GIVEN DURING THE 3RD YEAR. |
|
2 |
ESTIMATES ONLY - NOT BASED ON SCORES |
|
10 |
ESTIMATES ONLY. |
|
1 |
FAIR CROSS SECTION OF POPULATION IN TERMS OF WORK AND SOCIAL CLASS. IF 'A' LEVEL OF 72% GRADES A TO E IS NATIONAL AVERAGE? OUR 'A' LEVEL % IS 75.6 |
|
2 |
FALLING NUMBERS HAVE COINCIDENTALLY BROUGHT LOWER ABILITY INTAKE. SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN YEARS 1/2 AND YEARS 4/5 |
|
7 |
FEWER THAN AVERAGE LOW ABILITY |
|
1 |
FIGURES BASED ON RICHMOND TESTS OF BASIC SKILLS 1ST YEAR INTAKE |
|
2 |
FIGURES BASED ON STANDARDISED TESTS PERFORMED AT AGE 11 |
|
4 |
FIGURES BASED ON V.RQ SCORES 125+/105-125/95-105/85-95/70-85/ WHAT IS NATIONAL AVERAGE? |
|
4 |
FIGURES ESTIMATES - OUR INTAKE IS ABOUT NORMALLY DISTRIBUTED |
|
8 |
FIGURES NOT AVAILABLE |
|
3 |
FIGURES TAKEN FROM RESULTS OF RAVENS MATRICES ON NEW INTAKE |
|
5 |
FIND IT PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE THE ESTIMATE WHICH YOU HAVE REQUESTED HERE |
|
2 |
FOR MLD TYPE SCHOOL POPULATION OF ESTIMATE IF SUCH IS POSSIBLE |
|
1 |
GENERALLY ABOVE AVERAGE |
|
1 |
GENERALLY ABOVE AVERAGE (150-SIXTH FORM) |
|
3 |
GENERALLY ABOVE AVERAGE INTAKE. NOT SPECIFIC ON ABOVE ITEMS |
|
6 |
GENERALLY THE LEVEL OF PUPILS IS HIGHER THAN THE NAT AVERAGE - BUT WE ARE UNABLE TO FIX PROPORTIONS |
|
3 |
GOOD COMPREHENSIVE MIX |
|
1 |
GRAMMAR SCHOOL TAKES TOP 16% |
|
2 |
GUESSWORK |
|
6 |
GUESSWORK BASED ON EXAM RESULTS |
|
6 |
GUESSWORK MAINLY - BUT OUR EXAM RESULTS TEND TO CONFIRM AN ABOVE AVERAGE ABILITY RANGE |
|
2 |
GUESTIMATE BASED ON TOP 20% DOING O LEVEL & CSE GRADE 4 NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
2 |
HARDER WORKING WITH NON PARENTAL BACKING THAN OF CHILDREN - HOWEVER - VERY FEW "HIGH FLIERS" |
|
2 |
HEAVILY BOTTOM LOADED |
|
7 |
HIGH ABILITY PROFILE |
|
6 |
HIGHER IN YEARS 1-4. LOWER IN YEARS 5/L6 AND U6 |
|
3 |
HIGHLY ACADEMIC SCHOOL |
|
1 |
I AM SORRY NOT TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION TO HAND |
|
8 |
I CANNOT ANSWER THIS QUESTION SATISFACTORILY. |
|
2 |
I CANNOT ANSWER THIS RELIABLY |
|
4 |
I CANNOT DO MORE THAN GUESS. |
|
3 |
I CANT DO THIS. WE HAVE A PRETTY AVERAGE SPREAD OF ABILITY - SLIGHTLY SKEWED TO THE HIGH END. |
|
5 |
I CONSULTED PRINCIPAL TEACHER OF LEARNING SUPPORT SERVICES - A PT GUIDANCE WHO HAS DONE RESEARCH FOR M C ON THIS TOPIC AND CHILD GUIDANCE |
|
3 |
I DO NOT HAVE DATA TO ANSWER THE QUESTION |
|
3 |
I DO NOT HAVE THE STATISTICS AVAILABLE TO MAKE SUCH COMMENTS |
|
4 |
I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY "NATIONAL AVERAGE" |
|
8 |
I FEEL THAT I CANNOT ANSWER THIS QUESTION |
|
2 |
I HAVE CHOSEN ENTRY AT 11+ FOR THESE FIGURES. SOME "CATCH UP" DURING SECONDARY YEARS |
|
1 |
I HAVE COMPILED THESE FIGURES ON THE BASIS OF ATTAINMENT ON LEAVING SCHOOL/END OF FIFTH YEAR |
|
4 |
I HAVE NEVER ATTEMPTED TO CALCULATE THIS |
|
2 |
I HAVE NO DOCUMENTATION ON THIS |
|
4 |
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS |
|
2 |
I HAVE NO SURVEYS OR NORMS TO HELP ME FORMULATE AN ANSWER |
|
3 |
I HAVE NO WAY OF ANSWERING THIS QUESTION |
|
9 |
I RANG FOR GUIDANCE ON THIS/18 MTHS AHEAD MEANS LITTLE TO US. WE DO NOT WANT GIRLS TAKING O LEVEL AT 14 THOUGH MANY COULD |
|
3 |
I WOULD BE GUESSING |
|
5 |
IMBALANCE IN ACADEMIC LEVEL OF PUPILS DUE TO AREA SERVED INCREASED BY PLACING REQUESTS AT ENTRY TO S1 |
|
1 |
IMMINENT SCHOOL CLOSURE AND SPECIAL PROVISION OF S E N CLASSES HAS AFFECTED DISTRIBUTION OF INTAKE |
|
7 |
IMPOSSIABLE QUESTION |
|
4 |
IMPOSSIBLE - VALIDITY? |
|
4 |
IMPOSSIBLE QUESTIONS |
|
2 |
IMPOSSIBLE TASK WHAT IS THE NATIONAL AVERAGE? SCHOOL GENERALLY ABOVE NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
4 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER - WHAT IS THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. OUR RESEARCH IS EXTERNAL EXAMINATIONS ARE WELL ABOVE "NATIONAL AVERAGE". THE ACADEMIC "NATURE |
|
2 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER WITH ANY CONFIDENCE |
|
3 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER. |
|
2 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ASSESS |
|
2 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ASSESS WITH ANY ACCURACY BUT I BELIVE WE ARE SKEWED TO BELOW AVERAGE WITHIN A FULL RANGE |
|
2 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO BE PRECISE |
|
4 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THIS ACCURATELY - HOW DO WE OBTAIN INFORMATION ON '18 MONTHS AHEAD OF AGE GROUP |
|
1 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ESTIMATE |
|
7 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO ESTIMATE TO ANY ACCURATE DEGREE BUT THE SCHOOL IS ONE OF THE MOST DEPRIVED (SOCIAL/ECONOMICAL/CULTURAL) IN AN AUTHORITY WHOSE POPULA |
|
4 |
IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL |
|
2 |
IN 1985 14 PUPILS HAD 10 OR MORE O LEVELS OUT OF TOTAL 276. |
|
4 |
IN ADDITION TO BELOW AVERAGE INTAKE ACADEMICALLY WE HAVE MANY SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN OUR INTAKE |
|
4 |
IN EACH YEAR THE % WILL BE DIFFERENT!! |
|
1 |
IN REGARD TO 1985-6 5TH YEAR AT OUR SCHOOLIT IS GENERALLY HELD BY TEACHING STAFF THAT IT IS SOMEWHAT WEAKER THAN RECENT PREVIOUS 5TH YEARS. WHAT I |
|
2 |
IN SELECTIVE 5TH YEAR |
|
2 |
IN THE TIMES BEFORE 1981 ACT THE SCHOOL HAD 4 SPECIAL CLASSES - NOW THE NEEDS EXIST FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORT |
|
3 |
IN WHOLE SCHOOL COVER WIDE RANGE FROM HIGH - LOW |
|
1 |
IN YEARS 2-5 THIS IS A SELECTIVE SCHOOL |
|
3 |
INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION - IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER. |
|
9 |
INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS CREAM OFF MANY MORE ABLE PUPILS |
|
9 |
INFORMATION BASED ON NELSON COGNITIVE ABILITY TEST FOR ONE YEAR GROUP NOT MEASURED IN AGE NORMS |
|
2 |
INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE |
|
3 |
INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE ON THIS FORM MEAN SCORE OF ENTRY (NFER 'D') NORMALLY 102 |
|
3 |
INFORMATION NOT CATEGORISED IN THIS MANNER |
|
2 |
INTAKE BELOW AVERAGE |
|
3 |
INTAKE OF 70 PUPILS FROM EPA |
|
5 |
IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DEVICE WHAT THE ACADEMIC NATIONAL AVERAGE IS |
|
5 |
IT IS GENERALLY THE HIGHER ACADEMIC LEVEL PUPILS WHO TRANSFER TO A NEIGHBOURING 6 YEAR SCHOOL AT END OF S2 |
|
1 |
IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION AS WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS |
|
1 |
IT WOULD BE SPECIOUS TO RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION AS IT PRESUMES SOME VALID MEASURE OF GENERAL ACADEMIC ABILITY - WHICH DOES NOT EXIST - ANY RESPON |
|
2 |
JUST A GUESS |
|
2 |
LEA SELECTION PROCEDURE |
|
4 |
LEA STILL USES GRAMMAR/TECHNICAL SCHOOLS WITH 11 PLUS SELECTION. THIS IS A SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL |
|
3 |
LESS THAN AVERAGE TOP AND BOTTOM |
|
4 |
LOCAL 11-18 SCHOOLS TEND TO CREAM SOME MORE ABLE PUPILS - SITUATION OF JUNIOR AREA ADJUSTMENT CLASS ON SAME CAMPUS TENDS TO BOOST LOWER ABILITY IN |
|
2 |
LONG POOR ABILITY RAIL WITH AVERAGES LOWER THAN NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
5 |
MANY INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS IN THE AREA |
|
9 |
MARKED SKEW TO LEFT |
|
4 |
MLD |
|
3 |
MLD SCHOOL |
|
1 |
MOST YEARS AVERAGE VRQ ABOUT 100 W BUNCHING AROUND THAT FIGURE |
|
1 |
MUST BE IN TOP THREE BOOKLETS |
|
1 |
N/A THIS SCHOOL DID NOT HAVE AN INTAKE IN SEPT 1985 |
|
1 |
NEAR PERFECT CURVE WITH THE TOP DROPPED OFF. THIS LEA IS VERY UNEVEN IN ABILITY DISTRIBUTION |
|
2 |
NELSON C.A.T. SCORES SHOW A MARKED "LUMP" TO THE BELOW AVERAGE (NOT A "SKEW" BUT A REAL POPULATION DISTORTION) |
|
1 |
NFER VERBAL ABILITY TEST |
|
4 |
NO A REAL "STAR" CATCHMENT BUT DEFINATELY FAVOURABLE BY NATIONAL STANDARDS |
|
7 |
NO ACCURATE INFORMATION AVAILABLE |
|
4 |
NO ADEQUATE DATA |
|
4 |
NO DETAILED INFORMATION AVAILABLE-FIGURES GIVEN ARE REASONED ASSESSMENTS |
|
5 |
NO FIGURES ARE AVAILABLE IN THIS FORM |
|
9 |
NO FORMAL TESTING PUPILS OCCUPY FULL ABILITY RANGE |
|
7 |
NO INFORMATION-UNABLE TO COMPLETE |
|
4 |
NO RELIABLE INFORMATION ABOVE ESTIMATES FROM SCHOOL BASED TESTING |
|
1 |
NO SELECTION BUT LEGACY OF GRAMMAR SCHOOL INTAKE |
|
3 |
NO STATISTICS AVAILABLE |
|
2 |
NONE |
|
3 |
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION |
|
3 |
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION CENTRE |
|
3 |
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION FOR PUPILS IN AN AREA WHERE 33% OF PUPILS ARE CREANED OFF FOR GRAMMAR SCHOOLS. |
|
1 |
NORMAL HEAD & TAIL BUT MEDIAN IS SKEWED SLIGHTLY HIGH. |
|
3 |
NOT A 'NORMAL DISTRIBUTION' - THERE IS A SECOND 'PEAK' ABOVE AVERAGE - BUT ALSO A LONG TAIL OF LESS ABLE PUPILS |
|
6 |
NOT A LOT OF FAITH IN THESE FIGURES. ASSESSED BY CAT RESULTS |
|
4 |
NOT A STATISTIC THAT WE CALCULATE |
|
2 |
NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE THIS SECTION WITH ANY DEGREE OF ACCURACY |
|
1 |
NOT BASED ON I.Q. WHICH ARE NOT AVAILABLE . BASED ON V.R.& SCHOOL ASSESSMENT - THEREFORE NOT NATIONAL CRITERIA. |
|
3 |
NOT BIG ENOUGH TO COPE WITH EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF BELOW AVERAGE |
|
1 |
NOT KNOWN |
|
8 |
NOT POSSIBLE |
|
3 |
NOTE: A SYSTEM OF TRANSFER TO A 13-18YRS GRAMMAR SCHOOL - BY GUIDED PARENTAL CHOICE OPERATES AT 13+YRS 25% ARE RECOMMENDED TO TRANSFER ALMOST 40% |
|
2 |
ON NFER TESTS ON ENRTY ( VERBAL REASONING) AVERAGE SCORE FOR THE SCHOOL IS 98. |
|
8 |
ONLY 25% OF THE ABILITY RANGE IS ACCEPTED INTO THE SCHOOL. |
|
2 |
ONLY A GUT FEELING |
|
10 |
ONLY GUIDE WE HAVE IS AH2/3 SCORES (GIVEN ABOVE) |
|
4 |
OUR CATCHMENT AREA PRODUCES AN INTAKE BIASED TOWARDS TO MORE ABLE END OF DISTRIBUTION CURVE |
|
4 |
OUR CATCHMENT IS CONURBATION OVERSPILL WITH A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF UNEMPLOYEMT AND EVEN HIGHER ONE PARENT FAMILIES |
|
5 |
OUR INTAKE REFLECTS AN ABOVE AVERAGE ATTAINMENTS |
|
1 |
OUR PROFILE IS VERY CLOSE TO SCOTTISH NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
3 |
OVERALL ABILITY SLIGHTLY ABOVE NATIONAL AVERAGE.FEW HIGH FLIERS. LONG TAIL OF SLOW LEARNERS. |
|
4 |
OVERALL HIGH ABILITY BECAUSE OF NATURE OF CATCHMENT AREA. |
|
3 |
PLACEMENT IS CONDITIONAL ON DESIRE FOR & SUITABLITY |
|
1 |
PLEASE DEFINE NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
2 |
PRESSURE OF TIME - MAKES THE FIGURES GIVEN VERY APPROXIMATE |
|
5 |
PROBABLY ALMOST ALL ABOVE AVERAGE WITH A PROPORTION OF HIGH |
|
3 |
PROVIDE FOR CHILDREN WITH SEVERE AND PROFOUND LEARNING DIFFICULTIES |
|
1 |
PUPILS GENERALLY FOLLOW THE NORMAL CURVE OF DISTRIBUTION |
|
1 |
PUPILS HIGH IN ACHIEVEMENT % ASSESMENT PASSING ONE OR MORE O GRADES IN 1985 = 72% (NOT FIGURE 54%) H GRADE I DO MORE H GRADES IN FIFTH FORM YEAR 4 |
|
3 |
PUPILS PERFORM 10-15% ABOVE NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
4 |
PUPILS WITH MODERATE LEARNING DIFFICULTIES |
|
1 |
PURE GUESSWORK. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY MEANS OF COMPARISON EXCEPT I.QS. |
|
1 |
PURELY FROM READING TESTS - THE GENERAL ACADEMIC LEVEL IS CONSIDERABLY POORER IN THE SCHOOLS ESTIMATION |
|
7 |
QUITE IMPOSSIBLE TO ESTIMATE |
|
2 |
REALLY - IS THIS A REALISTIC QUESTION |
|
1 |
RECENT SURVEY OF SCHOOL INTAKE SHOWED AN ALMOST NORMAL DISTRIBUTION |
|
2 |
REFLECTS CHOICE FOR A CHURCH SCHOOL |
|
8 |
REGRET INFORMATION UNAVAILABLE. |
|
4 |
REMEDIAL AS WELL AS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND |
|
2 |
REMEDIAL WORK MOST EFFECTIVE IN YEARS 1 & 2 |
|
2 |
RESULTS AT 0 GRADE DEMONSTRATE SCHOOL TO BE JUST BELOW NATIONAL AVERAGE IN ITS PERFORMANCE |
|
1 |
ROUGH ESTIMATE |
|
3 |
S.L.D. SCHOOL |
|
1 |
SCHOOL DEALS WITH PROFOUND HANDICAP |
|
1 |
SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES USUALLY WITH ADDITIONAL SOCIAL HANDICAP |
|
1 |
SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTY ETC |
|
1 |
SCHOOL FOR M.L.D PUPILS |
|
1 |
SCHOOL FOR SPECIAL NEEDS |
|
1 |
SCHOOL INTAKE "CREAMED" BY 2 SCHOOLS NEARBY WITH NEAR GRAMMAR STATUS |
|
8 |
SCHOOL INTAKE THE RESULT OF PARENTAL PREFERENCE |
|
6 |
SCHOOL IS URBAN BUT A SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE CATCHMENT (DEFINED COMMUNITY) IN TERMS OF OUR LEA. |
|
3 |
SCHOOL'S PRIME FUNCTION IS TO CATER FOR CHILDREN WHO ARE UNDERFUNCTIONING BY AT LEAST 3 YEARS |
|
1 |
SEC. MODERN INTAKE IN 5TH. 30% OF AGE GROUP WENT TO GRAMMARS |
|
2 |
SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL |
|
1 |
SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL - GRAMMAR SCHOOLS KEEPING NUMBERS UP |
|
2 |
SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL TOP 25% OF ABILITY RANGE CREAMED OFF |
|
2 |
SECONDARY SCHOOL CREAMED BY TWO SINGLE LOW GRAMMAR SCHOOL & 11/18 COMP. WE DO HAVE A ESN (M) VISIT |
|
1 |
SEE MODERN |
|
2 |
SEE PECULIAR INTAKE ON PAGE 1. |
|
6 |
SELECTION TAKES PLACE AT 12+ - 28% TRANSFER TO GRAMMAR SCHLS |
|
1 |
SELECTIVE GRAMMAR SCHOOL |
|
2 |
SELECTIVE GRAMMAR SCHOOL SO MOST ARE ABOVE AVERAGE |
|
3 |
SELECTIVE INTAKE |
|
1 |
SELECTIVE PROCEDURE AT 12+ |
|
4 |
SELECTIVE SCHOOL |
|
5 |
SELECTIVE SCHOOL THEREFORE AS ABOVE BUT LARGER GIRLS GRAMMAR SCHOOL TAKES TOP. |
|
3 |
SEV LEARNING DIFFICULTIES |
|
1 |
SHOWED ABOVE AVERAGE BUT WITH LARGE NUMBER OF VERY ABLE OR LOW ATTAINED |
|
11 |
SIGNIFICANT VARIETIES IN BALANCE FROM YEAR TO YEAR GROUP. FIGURES REFLECT OVERALL IMPRESSION FOR CURRENT YEARS 1-5 |
|
5 |
SIGNIFICANT WAS BOTH HIGH AND BELOW AVERAGE COMPARED TO NORM |
|
6 |
SKEWED + 60-40 |
|
5 |
SKEWED TO BELOW AVERAGE |
|
3 |
SLIGHTLY 'HIGHER' SPREAD THAN SOME SCHOOLS I THINK. |
|
5 |
SLIGHTLY 'SCEWED' DISTRIBUTION CURVE |
|
9 |
SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE SHOW OWING TO INFLUX OF COMMUTER POPULATION & DECLINE OF INDIGENOUS POPULATION. |
|
3 |
SLIGHTLY SKEWED |
|
7 |
SLIGHTLY SKEWED UPWARDS SMALL REMEDIAL PROBLEM |
|
7 |
SOCIALLY VERY DEPRIVED AREA |
|
5 |
SOME TRAVELLING CHILDREN. NO NAT.TESTS DONE - ERQ IN MIDDLE SCHOOL INDICATES LOW FOR THIS COUNTY, WHICH ITSELF IS LOW NATIONALLY |
|
9 |
SORRY THE TOTALS ADD UP TO 95% OUR INTAKE IS SKEWED TOWARDS AVERAGE & LOWER END |
|
1 |
SOURCE - CHILD GUIDANCE READING AGE SURVEY |
|
3 |
SOURCE: SURVEY BY CHILD GUIDANCE ON READING AGES |
|
1 |
SPA SCHOOL. INTAKE OF BELOW AVERAGE PUPILS REMAINS HIGH - DESPITE DROP IN TOTAL INTAKE |
|
4 |
SPECIAL NEEDS 13.4% IN THIS COUNTY. THIS VARIES FROM 7.7% TO 52% |
|
1 |
SPECIAL SCHOOL |
|
2 |
SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARDING FOR CHILDREN WITH SEVERE LEARNING DISABILITIES |
|
1 |
SPECIAL SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH M.L.D |
|
2 |
SPECULATIVE |
|
2 |
STATISTICAL SURVEY OF THIS YEAR'S 1ST YEAR VIA RICHMOND/CAT STANINES APPENDED |
|
6 |
TAKEN FROM COUNTY READING SURVEY OF ALL 5TH YEAR PUPILS 1985 |
|
7 |
TAKEN FROM NFER IQ TESTS OF PUPILS WHO ENTERED YEAR 1 IN SEPT 1984 (NOT THE PRESENT 5TH YEAR) |
|
4 |
TAKEN FROM OUR OWN "BANDS"/NOT NATIONALLY COMPARED |
|
7 |
TAKEN FROM READING AGES (DANIELS & DIACK TEST 12) OF SEPT 85 INTAKE |
|
7 |
TESTED AT 11+ |
|
5 |
THE % OF PUPILS GAINING 5+ O LEVELS IS 34% OF THE YEAR GROUP |
|
1 |
THE 42% ASIAN INTAKE OF THE SCHOOL MEANS THAT AT THE PRESENT TIME LANG PROBLEMS AFFECT PROGRESS |
|
5 |
THE ABILITY RANGE IN THE SCHOOL IS SKEWED UPWARDS |
|
5 |
THE ABILITY RANGE IS NOTICEABLY SKEWED TOWARDS THE MORE ABLE |
|
1 |
THE ABOVE ESTIMATES ARE BASED ON NORMS DERIVED FROM RICHMOND TESTS OF BASIC ABILITY (USED IN YRS 1-3) AND ON O/CSE RESULTS AT END OF 5TH YEAR SINC |
|
7 |
THE AUTHORITY PRACTISES A SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR GRAMMAR SCHOOL INTAKE OF 30-40% OF THE AGE GROUP |
|
1 |
THE AVERAGE I.Q. IS 125. |
|
1 |
THE AVERAGE VRQ OF OUR ENTRY IS 110 |
|
4 |
THE IQ FOR THE CATCHMENT AREA PEAKS AT 103. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO BREAK DOWN INTO THE CATEGORIES ABOVE. |
|
3 |
THE NORMAL CURVE OF DISTRIBUTION SKEWS DOWNWARDS BECAUSE OF OUR CATCHMENT AREA |
|
5 |
THE NORMAL CURVE SHOULD INDICATE BELOW AVERAGE. IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER YEAR 1 OR YEAR 5 - WHAT MEASURE FOR AVERAGE? AVERAGE AT WHAT? |
|
2 |
THE PRESENT 5TH YEAR WERE SELECTED FOR A GRAMMAR SCHOOL EDUCATION IN 1981. |
|
1 |
THE SCHOOL HAS A SELECTED INTAKE - TAKING ABOUT TOP 30-40% |
|
3 |
THE SCHOOL HAS A SHAIRED INTAKE DEMANDS AND SERVES MAINLY A DISADVANTAGED AREA |
|
7 |
THE SCHOOL HAS A VERY SKEWED DOWN INTAKE BECAUSE OF A) SOCIO/ECONOMIC FACTORS OF AREA B) RECENT UNPOPULARITY WHICH CREAMS OF SCHOOL STILL FURTHER. |
|
2 |
THE SCHOOL HAS FEW VERY BRIGHT CHILDREN AND A LONG "TAIL". |
|
4 |
THE SCHOOL HAS ONE OF THE LOWEST ABILITY INTAKES IN THE COUNTY |
|
4 |
THE SCHOOL INTAKE ????? VIRTUALLY TO WHOLE INABILITY RANGE FROM THOSE WITH HIGH ABILITY TO THOSE PUPILS WITH MILD/MODERATE LEARNING DIFFICULTIES. |
|
3 |
THE SCHOOL INTAKE SINCE 1981 HAS BEEN CLOSER TO FULL RANGE |
|
3 |
THE SCHOOL IS A SECONDARY MODERN IN A SELECTIVE AREA WHERE 45% OF THE POPULATION GO TO 'GRAMMAR' SCHOOLS |
|
2 |
THE SCHOOL IS IN A GOOD AREA BUT THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF "CREAMING" OFF TO PRIVATE SECTOR. |
|
1 |
THE SCHOOL IS SELECTIVE & ADMITS TOP 25-28% OF ABILITY RANGE |
|
2 |
THE SCHOOL IS VERY POPULAR ESPECIALLY IN AN AFFLUENT PROFESSIONAL/WHITE COLLAR AREA OF CATCHMENT |
|
4 |
THE SCHOOL ONLY HAS 5TH YEAR PUPILS FOR 1985/86 BECAUSE OF IMMINENT CLOSURE |
|
4 |
THE SCHOOL RECEIVES A BALANCED INTAKE FOLLOWING THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION CURVE |
|
3 |
THE SCHOOL TAKES THE TOP 25% OF THE LOCAL ABILITY RANGE. |
|
2 |
THE TOP 4% OF THE ABILITY RANGE ARE CREATED |
|
1 |
THE TOP OF THE RANGE IS ATTRACTED TO A BETTER COMPREHENSIVE |
|
2 |
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN YEAR GROUPS WHICH WOULD AFFECT GROUPS 2 & 5. |
|
1 |
THERE ARE STILL GRAMMAR SCHOOLS IN THIS COUNTY |
|
5 |
THERE IS A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES IN THE AREA - 65% APPROX |
|
3 |
THERE IS VERY CONSIDERABLE VARIATION FROM YEAR TO YEAR AS A RESULT OF THE HISTORY OF THE SCHOOL. THE ABOVE APPLIES TO YEARS 1 AND 2 |
|
2 |
THESE ARE ON THE HIGH SIDE OF THE LOCAL LEA ACADEMIC PROFILE, WHICH IN NATIONAL TERMS IS SCALED UPWARDS. |
|
2 |
THESE ARE ONLY MY OPINIONS - NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE TO BACK UP THESE FIGURES |
|
2 |
THESE ARE ROUGH ESTIMATES |
|
5 |
THESE ARE THE EXACT % AS INDICATED AT 11+ TRANSFER. |
|
4 |
THESE CAN ONLY BE VERY ROUGH ESTIMATES AND IT WILL VARY FROM YEAR TO YEAR |
|
1 |
THESE FIGS ARE TAKEN FROM SAMPLE OF FOUNDATION YEAR (56%) |
|
4 |
THESE FIGURES ARE BASED ON THE TWO NFER TESTS WE USE IN THE LAST YEAR OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOL. THERE IS NO 'NATIONAL AVERAGE' BECAUSE THERE IS NO AG |
|
2 |
THESE FIGURES ARE ESTIMATES |
|
3 |
THESE FIGURES WERE VERY DIFFICULT TO ARRIVE AT |
|
5 |
THESE RELATE TO PRESENT 5TH YEAR. COMPARE WITH PRESENT 1ST YEAR - 6% - 35% - 55% - 4% |
|
2 |
THIS IS A CRUDE ESTIMATE |
|
5 |
THIS IS A FAIRLY GOOD RURAL CATCHMENT |
|
3 |
THIS IS A MIDDLE CLASS RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH A HIGH PROPORTION OF PROFESSIONAL PARENTS WHICH PRODUCES AN ATYPICAL RANGE FOR A COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL |
|
1 |
THIS IS A MLD SCHOOL |
|
1 |
THIS IS A MOST DIFFICULT QUESTION |
|
3 |
THIS IS A SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL CO-EXISTING WITH GRAMMAR AND COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOLS |
|
3 |
THIS IS A SECONDRY MODERN SCHOOL IN AN AREA WHERE 30% |
|
2 |
THIS IS A SELECTIVE GRAMMAR SCHOOL ACCEPTING THE TOP 40% ABILITY GIRLS IN THE AREA. MOST WOULD BE IN THE FIRST TWO GROUPS |
|
7 |
THIS IS A SELECTIVE SCHOOL TAKING APPROX 1/3 OF THE ABILITY RANGE. |
|
1 |
THIS IS A SUBJECTIVE ESTIMATE BASED ON 1976-77 INTAKE (GROUP TESTING IS FORBIDDEN IN THIS REGION) |
|
2 |
THIS IS A VERY CRUDE ESTIMATE |
|
3 |
THIS IS AN ESTIMATE |
|
1 |
THIS IS AN ESTIMATE - STANDARDISED MEASUREMENTS NOT FULLY AVAILABLE. |
|
2 |
THIS IS BASED ON LITTLE MORE THAN GUESSES |
|
1 |
THIS IS DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE. |
|
1 |
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY AN ARTISAN COMMUNITY |
|
2 |
THIS IS GUESS WORK TO PUT IT MILDLY |
|
8 |
THIS IS IN DISPUTE - I THINK THE DISTRIBUTION OF INTELLIGENCE |
|
5 |
THIS IS PURE GUESSWORK UNSUPPORTED BY STATISTICAL DATA |
|
4 |
THIS IS VERY APPROXIMATE AND RELATED TO E.R.Q. LEAVERS |
|
4 |
THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DO. WE ARE NON SELECTIVE BUT IN AN AREA WITH HIGH OVERALL ATTAINMENT COMPARED TO NATIONAL AVERAGE. |
|
6 |
THIS IS VERY HYPOTHETICAL-I AM ONLY GUESSING-IF CSE4 IS NAT AVERAGE WE DO NOT DO ANY CSES |
|
1 |
THIS SCHOOL HAS A SELECTIVE INTAKE BASED ON ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS |
|
4 |
THIS SCHOOL HAS LOST A LOT OF PUPILS AS A RESULT OF 1981 PARENTS CHARTER. MOST OF THE MORE ABLE PUPILS TRANSFER TO ANOTHER SCHOOL AT THE END OF PR |
|
3 |
THIS SCHOOL ONLY TAKES PUPILS WHO ARE 2 YEARS OR MORE BEHIND |
|
1 |
THIS SHOWS FURTHER TOWARDS THE LOWER ABILITIES AFTER 2ND YR SINCE OUR MEANS ABLE/COMMITTED PUPILS TRANSFER AT PARENTAL REQUEST TO 11-18 SNR HIGH S |
|
1 |
TOP 27% OF ABILITY RANGE ADMITTED AT 11+ ON BASIS OF 2 HOUSE TESTS - ALL COUNTY DECISIONS |
|
3 |
TOP RANGE ENTER GRAMMAR SCHOOLS |
|
2 |
TYPICAL COMPREHENSIVE INTAKE - PERHAPS FEWER BELOW AVERAGE THAN USUAL |
|
3 |
TYPICAL SPREAD FOR A SCHOOL FOR MODERATE NEEDS CHILDREN |
|
1 |
UNABLE TO ANSWER |
|
3 |
UNABLE TO ANSWER WHAT IS NATIONAL AVERAGE |
|
3 |
UNABLE TO FULLY COMMENT |
|
3 |
UNANSWERABLE |
|
1 |
UNCERTAIN WHETHER THE CORRECT CRITERIA TAKEN: FIGURES BASED ON NFER STANDARDISED TEST SCORE-HIGH 120+/ABOVE AVERAGE 106-119/AV 95-105/BELOW AV 81- |
|
1 |
UPPER MIDDLE CLASS CATCHMENT AREA |
|
2 |
URBAN OVERSPILL EFFECT - LARGELY COUNCIL HOUSING |
|
7 |
USE OF "WIDESPAN" INDICATES BELOW AVERAGE IN LANGUAGE |
|
1 |
USUAL COMMUTER BELT POPULATION |
|
3 |
V DIFFICULT TO COUNT ACCURATELY |
|
4 |
V DIFFICULT TO QUANTIFY SCHOOL HAS GOOD EXAM RESULTS COMP W NAT AVE |
|
5 |
VAGUE ESTIMATES |
|
1 |
VARIES ACCORDING TO YEAR. |
|
2 |
VARIES CONSIDERABLY FROM YEAR TO YEAR |
|
2 |
VARIES CONSTANTLY ACROSS WHOLE RANGE. |
|
1 |
VARIES FROM YEAR TO YEAR |
|
3 |
VARIES QUITE A LOT FROM YEAR TO YEAR |
|
3 |
VERIFIED BY AREA SCREENING |
|
4 |
VERY APPROXIMATE |
|
2 |
VERY APPROXIMATE - WE ARE A SOCIAL PRIORITY SCHOOL |
|
3 |
VERY CLOSE TO NORMAL DISTRIBUTION FULLY COMPREHENSIVE INTAKE |
|
5 |
VERY DIFFERENT IN 1ST AND 2ND YEAR FROM YEARS 3-5 (OPTIONAL 13+ TRANSFER LOWERS ACADEMIC LEVEL OF SENIOR SCHOOL) |
|
3 |
VERY DIFFICULT TO ASSESS ACCURATELY |
|
6 |
VERY DIFFICULT TO ASSESS. VERY HIGH PASS RATE IN NATIONAL EXAMINATIONS |
|
3 |
VERY DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE |
|
5 |
VERY DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE AS PUPILS NOT TESTED ON SUITABLE SCALES |
|
2 |
VERY DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE WITHOUT A DETAILED TEST FROM PUPILS |
|
1 |
VERY INACURATE ESTIMATE |
|
2 |
VERY LOW IN FIRST TWO CATEGORIES. MOST IN THIRD TAILS OFF TOWARDS FIFTH CATEGORY. |
|
1 |
VERY MUCH A GUESTIMATE |
|
1 |
VERY MUCH AN ESTIMATE! |
|
3 |
VERY ROUGH ESTIMATE |
|
6 |
VERY RURAL CATCHMENT AREA |
|
5 |
VERY SELECTIVE ENTRY EXAMS AT 8 OR 11 |
|
3 |
VERY SUBJECTIVE ESTIMATES IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY RELEVANT DATA OTHER THAN PRIMARY READING AND NUMBER SCORES + O/CSE & A LEVEL PERFORMANCES. |
|
2 |
VEY APPROXIMATE |
|
6 |
VIEW POINT BASED ON CSE RESULTS |
|
5 |
VRP AVER 90-92 |
|
4 |
VRQ RATING FROM J4 AVERAGES OUT AT 96. |
|
1 |
VRQ'S AVERAGE 92-95 WHEN TESTED WITH NFER AVERAGE IS HIGHER. |
|
2 |
WE ACCEPT ONLY THOSE PUPILS WE THINK LIKELY TO ACHIEVE AT LEAST FOUR OR FIVE 'O'S AT C+ |
|
4 |
WE ARE 25% APPROX CREAMED OFF EACH YEAR TO LOCAL 14-18 SCHOOL |
|
2 |
WE ARE A GRAMMAR SCHOOL HENCE THE ANSWER |
|
3 |
WE ARE A SELECTIVE SCHOOL OF PUPILS IN TOP 25% AT AGE OF 11 |
|
4 |
WE ARE A SELECTIVE SCHOOL. |
|
1 |
WE ARE APPARENTLY AN AVERAGE SCHOOL WITH AN AVERAGE SPREAD OF ABILITY |
|
5 |
WE ARE CREATED BY A GRAMMAR SCHOOL THEREFORE THE MOST ABLE |
|
4 |
WE ARE GENERALLY JUST ON THE HIGH SIDE OF A CURVE OF NORMAL DISTRIBUTION |
|
5 |
WE ARE NON-SELECTIVE SCHOOL IN AREA WHERE THERE IS SELECTION TO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS AT 12+ |
|
1 |
WE ARE SKEWED TO THE LESS ABLE & EDUCATION IS NOT A LOCAL PRIORITY |
|
4 |
WE ARE SKEWED TOWARDS THE UPPER ABILITY RANGE |
|
2 |
WE DO NOT HAVE A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION FOR A COMPREHENSIVE INTAKE. DEFINATE & MARKED UPWARD 'SKEW'. |
|
7 |
WE DO NOT RUN TEST INSTRUMENTS WHICH WOULD PROVIDE US WITH THIS INFORMATION. A GUESSTIMATE WOULD NOT SEEM APPROPRIATE |
|
2 |
WE DO NOT TEST IN THIS WAY BUT WOULD PERHAPS SUGGEST OUR INTAKE IS SLIGHTLY SKEWED TO THE BRIGHT |
|
3 |
WE DO NOT WORK ACCORDING TO THESE CRITERIA; WE USE COGNITIVE ABILITY TESTS; THESE REVEALED A SLIGHT SKEW TO ABOVE ABERAGE - BUT SO DO MOST E. SUSS |
|
5 |
WE EXPECT ABOUT 30% OF ANNUAL INTAKE TO OBTAIN 5 OR MORE O LEVELS. APPROX 15% GO ON TO HIGHER EDUCATION. |
|
6 |
WE HAVE 13+ TRANSFER AND THIS ALLOWS THE RANGE OF ABILITY IN |
|
1 |
WE HAVE A FAIRLY NORMAL DISTRIBUTION |
|
4 |
WE HAVE A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION CURVE (WE THINK!) |
|
2 |
WE HAVE A ONE - CLASS INTAKE & LOSE THE MORE ABLE TO THE MORE 'FASHIONABLE' SCHOOLS. THE ABOVE % IS BASED ON AH/2 TESTS. |
|
6 |
WE HAVE A RURAL CATCHMENT AREA BUT WITH SIGNIFICANT COMMUTERS |
|
5 |
WE HAVE A VERY HETEROGENEOUS CATCHMENT AREA - IDEAL FOR A COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL |
|
5 |
WE HAVE A VERY WIDE RANGE BUT THE AVERAGE IS "ABOVE AVERAGE" |
|
5 |
WE HAVE ALL THE RC GIRLS IN SUNDERLAND SOUTH IN OUR SCHOOL THEREFORE A VERY WIDE ABILITY AND SOCIAL RANGE |
|
7 |
WE HAVE AN ESN UNIT ATTACHED TO THE SCHOOL |
|
3 |
WE HAVE AVERAGE DISTRIBUTION WITH A LITTLE WEIGHTING AT END |
|
5 |
WE HAVE NEVER MADE CALCULATIONS OF THIS NATURE |
|
3 |
WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO NATIONAL MONEY AND HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING |
|
3 |
WE HAVE NO FIGURES; OUR EXAM RESULTS SUGGESTS THE PUPILS ARE ABOVE AVERAGE |
|
1 |
WE HAVE NO TESTING IN THE AUTHORITY. OWN FIGURES SUGGEST ?????? FROM NORMAL DISTRIBUTION |
|
4 |
WE HAVE ONE YEAR (V) OF A GIRLS GRAMMAR AND A MIXED COMPREHENSIVE SIXTH |
|
4 |
WE HAVENT PUPILS OF ALL ABILITIES. 1 CLASS HONOURS POTENTIAL IS EXTREMELY "SLOW". WE ARE NOT FAR OFF NORMAL NATIONAL AVERAGE - I SUSPECT. |
|
1 |
WE RECEIVE VERY FEW EXCEPTIONALLY BRIGHT PUPILS |
|
5 |
WE TAKE THE FULL RANGE BUT NOT ALL ABOVE AVERAGE PUPILS COME. APPROX 40 P.A ARE ALLOCATED TO GRAMMAR SCHOOLS. |
|
3 |
WE TEND TO HAVE MORE OF THE EXTREMES |
|
5 |
WE'RE GUESSING |
|
5 |
WELL ABOVE AVERAGE BUT NOT PREPARED TO ESTIMATE |
|
2 |
WHAT A STUPID QUESTION! WE DO NOT "MEASURE" CHILDREN THIS WAY |
|
2 |
WHAT IS NATIONAL AVERAGE? UNABLE TO ANSWER |
|
2 |
WIDESPAN READING TEST RESULTS FOR PRESENT 5TH YEAR WHEN IN 3RD YEAR |
|
4 |
WOULD FIND IT DIFFICULT TO SEPARATE FIRST 2 CATEGORIES |
|
1 |
WOULD FOLLOW CURVE OF NORMAL DISTRIBUTION A FEW CROSS-SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY |
|
6 |
WOULD NOT JUDGE IN THIS FORMAT ABOVE AVERAGE EG 36% OF YEAR GROUP GAINING 5+ O LEVELS GRADES A-C |
|
1 |
YEARS 1 & 2 ONLY |
|
4 |
YEARS DO VARY THIS IS AVERAGE BUT RESULTS LAST YEAR PARTICULARLY GOOD |
|
1 |