Support thread for parents of chilldren sitting the transfer test in 2011

leftieM

My child's school ran assessments in P5 in numeracy and literacy (6 different tests in total). The assessments were supplied by GL. They have the format that AQE have i.e. based on a normal distribution curve with 100 being the national average and the median (i.e. 50% of children get less or=100 and 50% more than 100).
GL claim that the results are predictors for outcomes at KS2 in terms to levels and I wonder can they also estimate the outcome in the transfer test.

Has anyone had a child who got level 5 in english and maths but less than 110 in AQE? That would give an indication of how comparable these P5 tests are.

travellinglight_2

leftieM wrote: »

My child's school ran assessments in P5 in numeracy and literacy (6 different tests in total). The assessments were supplied by GL. They have the format that AQE have i.e. based on a normal distribution curve with 100 being the national average and the median (i.e. 50% of children get less or=100 and 50% more than 100).
GL claim that the results are predictors for outcomes at KS2 in terms to levels and I wonder can they also estimate the outcome in the transfer test.

Has anyone had a child who got level 5 in english and maths but less than 110 in AQE? That would give an indication of how comparable these P5 tests are.

a child who in p6 got 109 and 110 in these tests got 103 in aqe.... how does this seem to you? got level 5 across the board.thanks for your info.

leftieM

I'd love to see lots of numbers on this but maybe it is comparing apples with oranges.
In terms of numbers, 109.5 average and 103 aren't miles apart. All children will have sat the SATs but a smaller number (2/3rds??) will have sat the AQE exams and they will tend to be the higher attainers. So the median for the SATS (100) represents lower attainment than the median (100) for AQE.
About a third of all children would be expected to achieve L5 in English and Maths by the end of KS2. So, based on that, a score of 103 is probably putting a child in the top third of all children, given that lower attaining children are less likely to have sat the transfer tests.

So in conclusion, an average of, say, 125 in SATs will transfer to approx 110-115 in AQE, if that child maintains their position relative to their peers.

(No-one else will have a notion what I'm on about there, but I know what I mean :cool:).

travellinglight_2

leftieM wrote: »

I'd love to see lots of numbers on this but maybe it is comparing apples with oranges.
In terms of numbers, 109.5 average and 103 aren't miles apart. All children will have sat the SATs but a smaller number (2/3rds??) will have sat the AQE exams and they will tend to be the higher attainers. So the median for the SATS (100) represents lower attainment than the median (100) for AQE.
About a third of all children would be expected to achieve L5 in English and Maths by the end of KS2. So, based on that, a score of 103 is probably putting a child in the top third of all children, given that lower attaining children are less likely to have sat the transfer tests.




So in conclusion, an average of, say, 125 in SATs will transfer to approx 110-115 in AQE, if that child maintains their position relative to their peers.

(No-one else will have a notion what I'm on about there, but I know what I mean :cool:).

ok... and an average of 109.5 would equate to .... is there a range you'd suggest and on what do you base these? we are applying for special circ and feel our ds would have scored higher... where can we find an explanation abt these gl assessment scores to compare with aqe? Given that school finishes this week and our sons PS is not awfully interested in transfer.. and "not miles apart " leaves me thinking they are someway apart... even 1 more mark would have got our son into his preferred school... but how do I show the relationship between gl scores and his result?
thanks

confused_mummy_3

GL scores are standardized just the same as AQE when your child sat GL he would have been compared to children of the same age it is actually the same as AQE. So if he scored 110 in GL and 103 in AQE there is a significant drop in his scores which is probably in reflection to the trauma he was going through at the time of AQE.

In our school the children sat NFER in P4 they then changed to PIE and PIM in P5 onwards.

It is my understanding that they can only use standardized scores when comparing to AQE from P5 and P6.

The sats cannot be compared because they aren't standardized.

leftieM

They are not directly comparable and I can't find out anything that shows any direct comparison. Sorry. I'm not even sure that they are testing the same things. The thing they have in common is that they compare children to each other rather than giving an absolute value, so your child would score approx. 103 in the AQE in any year if pitted against the same children. So yes, they could have got 105 or 101 possibly on a different day.
If your child had a score of 130 in the SATs, showing that they are in the top 4%, and got 103 in the AQE showing them in the top 30% (estimated), you'd have a good case. 109.5 puts them in the top 30% approximately for the population as a whole. They've shown a similar result in the AQE tests so I personally think that the scores are consistent. Still, persistence can achieve many things so worth a shot anyway!
As I say, I lack much data on this. If any parents feel the desire to post their SATs vs AQE results it would help build a picture.

leftieM

confused_mummy wrote: »

GL scores are standardized just the same as AQE when your child sat GL he would have been compared to children of the same age it is actually the same as AQE. So if he scored 110 in GL and 103 in AQE there is a significant drop in his scores which is probably in reflection to the trauma he was going through at the time of AQE.

In our school the children sat NFER in P4 they then changed to PIE and PIM in P5 onwards.

It is my understanding that they can only use standardized scores when comparing to AQE from P5 and P6.

The sats cannot be compared because they aren't standardized.

The ones my child's school uses are standardised.
You have to remember that SATs compare children of all abilites whereas AQE compares children who sit the AQE only. They are skewed towards the top end of the distribution curve, so the median moves higher. That is why you cannot just compare the numbers, you need to allow for this difference in the sample set (or 'kids' to leave out the maths terms).

confused_mummy_3

Well Pie is testing english and Pim is testing Maths same as aqe only it is given as an average score of the two. I know that is what is being used by post principals when they are comparing to what they would have got if there wasnt SC so there must be comparison.

travellinglight_2

confused_mummy wrote: »

Well Pie is testing english and Pim is testing Maths same as aqe only it is given as an average score of the two. I know that is what is being used by post principals when they are comparing to what they would have got if there wasnt SC so there must be comparison.

I'm sorry, what do you mean? That post primary principals use the GL PIM in english and maths and compare it to the AQE.... but how do we know how these equate or compare? Is there a standard accepted way of working this out or is it up to each Board of Gov? This is my problem... any teachers out there????

leftieM

A strategy you could use is look at the comparison between your child's SATs and the class average and ask the teacher for the AQE class average (hopefully they have it) and your child's score. If your child has fallen below the AQE class average but is above the SATs class average then you would have some measurable evidence for a drop off in his results.