CATs score in top schools

Are CAT score hurdle rates changing in Central London as the number of applications increase?

There were 500 sitting SPGS second round this year, 1400 for LU, and it goes on; FHS had 600 interviewed for 60 places….. some with CAT scores 135+ did not get interviews at SPGS. I know anyone below 130 did not get interviewed at G&L and some with 135+ scores didn’t (probably flunked the ISEB). At CLGS only girls 135+ got into 2nd round exam. Interesting that girls with CATs 130- got Wycombe Abbey places.

Interesting. Although, is it not true to say that in schools (state), they use CAT4 results to set students and to provide them with a flight path. If the schools don't show the progress in line with this path, they will deploy extra resources/support and students themselves would presumably be sensitive to predictions/expectations so likely a degree of self-fulfilling prophecy at play too.

CAT4 test scores have an 0.81 correlation with GCSE results, so they are a very good guide for how a student will perform on GCSE tests. The research of 70,000 students in England supports this.

www.researchgate.net/publication/222403422_Intelligence_and_Educational_Achievement

@Jaxx Thank you so much for posting your DS's scores. When I talked to DS's school they assured me that CAT scores don't change much at all, "maybe 5 or 6 points but that's it".

DS got very low spatial similar to your DS's for his CAT score. So I thought well that's it then. But another Mum posted a while back and wrote something very similar to what you've written, low scores across the board. She said they didn't do anything specific but just carried on with 11+ work, English and maths mostly and in the end he got 141 on quant and very high on all the others.

My DS's other scores also were similar to your DS's. It's given me hope that he might be able to pull upwards. He's a bright boy but is slow to get things sometimes. It's a strange combination because sometimes it's like he's all there and other times he misses the simplest of things.

I'm very glad to hear sciences going so well too for your DS with the low spatial. Again, gives me hope.

"borderline score on the entrance exam" would be more appropriate in the last paragraph than "poor score".

[quote LondonGirl83]@2atschool state schools do Cats but they don’t share them with parents.

They are used by state schools for a number of purposes.[/quote]
Actually I think DS did do them in Year 4 and we did get some sort of generalised report but didn't with older DD.
But I don't think they were shared with the Secondary Schools we applied for, just whether they were meeting expectations, exceeding etc etc.
I just mean there seems to be an awful lot of focus on them when it comes to schools applied to in the Prep sector but pretty much zero when coming from a state primary.

In theory, CATs are supposed to be used to identify misalignment of achievement with ability, specifically when a child is achieving below their ability; they're supposed to be a diagnostic to help a school determine which children to focus on. However, senior school admissions also use the scores in the opposite manner, to identify which children have achieved above their ability.

In terms of academics, the most selective schools' ideal candidates have high scores on the entrance exams and correspondingly high CATs. A child with a decent but not spectacular score on the entrance exam but lower CATs may be rejected as likely having been "over-tutored". A child with high CATs but a poor score on the entrance exam begs the question: why? The response will be different for a child who went to a deprived primary than for a child who went to a "top" primary.

@2atschool state schools do Cats but they don’t share them with parents.

They are used by state schools for a number of purposes.

I believe CATs are done in many state primaries but not usually share with the parents. Y7 CATs quite common for target setting in state secondaries.

My DS used Atom for quite a while but not religiously nor hitting the weekly targets most weeks. It was useful as it is adaptive, that is to say that it would keep on providing more and more difficult questions. He managed to often get a high Atom score with still many incorrect, presumably because he hit those harder questions.

Yes, kids can be naturally bright but I doubt any kid without any prep would do very well in an ISEB or 11+ exam. Of course, if you've sent your child to a private especially prep school they will get lots of practice on these sort of tests. Still, many parents tutor on top.

If it helps, I would wager a guess that doing very well in English/VR is always a great help, especially with boys. Lots of kids do well in maths and with NVR you can probably reach your 'plateau' if you focus on it within 6-8 weeks (although little and often is probably better).

I was reading this thread out if interest only as my son is in Y10 now. CAT scores can change quite significantly as can be seen by my son’s scores below.

Y4 Average:106 Verbal:107 Quant:126 Non-Verbal:106 Spatial:83

Y5 Average: 110 Verbal: 114 Quant: 126 Non-Verbal: 105 Spatial:94

Y6 Average: 127 Verbal: 134 Quant: 136 Non-Verbal: 124 Spatial: 114

The spiky profile is to be expected as he has autism. He wasn’t tutored but we did work through quite a lot of reasoning books. If Atom was around then, I hadn’t heard of it. Interestingly, the Y6 scores were much closer to ED Psych’s assessment made as part of his diagnosis.

ISEB pre-test didn’t go well for him and he didn’t get past the first round for the school we applied for that used it. Disappointing at the time, but it was probably for the best.

He is doing very well now - even in the science subjects he shouldn’t be able to do.

Which school has Science papers on an 11plus exam? Just interested as none do around us?
CAT scores always a bit of a mystery to me - state schools don’t do them so all the talk around them is irrelevant for so many children.
I’m always slightly grateful I never had a Prep school head telling me which schools we should apply to because they seem to get it wrong quite a lot reading through the threads.

@MrsWonderland - drawing references to our own experience, isn’t intended to be a stealth boast? In terms of children and their respective strengths & weaknesses, in CATS or otherwise..mine are all ends of the spectrum. But when talking about high CAT scores...it’s inevitable to reference the child with that experience. If it’s a post questioning whether low or average scores necessarily equate with failure..or mediocre performance..then I could also add plenty to that discussion too Every child is different...I think we all know that.

Some hilarious stealth boasts on this thread. Actually I take that back. Nothing stealth about it!

@FlyingPandas - yes absolutely, high CATS alone are not a comprehensive guarantee of anything. Which is why most schools rely on a range of assessments, not just reasoning. It certainly wouldn’t have guaranteed my child her place or her scholarship. By assessing other aspects, such as free writing, careful assessment of comprehension skills, or application of science knowledge in some schools - all help build a better picture of that child’s suitability for that particular school. For instance, the clincher on a science paper for our daughter, was the fact they didn’t just question learned knowledge by way of simple fact recall. They posed questions that tested ability to predict outcomes, as well as a really unusual question on embryos, which was quite advanced for a 10 year old, and looked to identify those children that could make a reasoned connection on what had been posed, and discuss why. Another school’s scholarship process, included an essay question on a well known historical figure...although some candidates had great factual recall than she had, she apparently analysed the question better, and gave a greater level of detailed answer. It really does depend on the school of course, but yes, CATS alone..are never the be all and end all.

[quote stooshmum]@Schoolmummmy thank you for the encouragement. But my point was that raw talent doesn’t always win. I believe CAT scores are all about raw talent, and my son has always done well in them. But they don’t always indicate success at school entrance exams.

However, we did not tutor to test.

My son started using Atom during the October half term, so not for very long.

Sadly, I think being naturally ‘bright’ isn’t always enough if the children don’t suit the examinations.[/quote]
I would agree with this - you only have to look at some of the posts on the girls' and boys' 11+ threads here to see that ISEB was the downfall of some children, for example. Different exam styles will inevitably suit different children.

We were lucky in that our DS seemed well suited to that kind of assessment and has achieved offers at both the selectives we applied to (Hampton & RGS). We'll never know now whether he'd have been successful based on the original exams, of course, but ISEB clearly suited him well. But there were definitely others on the threads who found that a bad ISEB day - or even just a lower score in one of the four areas - meant that a DC with high CATs or ATOM scores didn't make the grade for an offer.

I would also say, based on the experience of one of the SW London boys' thread posters - beware of prep school heads who over-sell a DC's promise based on CAT scores alone. In their case the prep head had very much led them to believe that their DS would be a shoe-in for a Hampton scholarship because his CAT scores were so high, but in reality he has ended up on the waitlist and is distraught because he was more or less led to believe that a scholarship was his for the taking. Definitely a point worth considering for any future lurkers.

CAT scores might be an indicator of raw ability but they are not a guarantee of anything.

@Schoolmummmy thank you for the encouragement. But my point was that raw talent doesn’t always win. I believe CAT scores are all about raw talent, and my son has always done well in them. But they don’t always indicate success at school entrance exams.

However, we did not tutor to test.

My son started using Atom during the October half term, so not for very long.

Sadly, I think being naturally ‘bright’ isn’t always enough if the children don’t suit the examinations.

@stooshmum - My understanding is that HABS select for interview, on the basis of their own initial assessment - which comprises a combination of written English, reasoning tests etc. I know a child currently there, who averaged high 120s on CATS, so presumably also did well on the HABS assessments. Another child in that same year, with similar scores...didn’t get to interview either. They know what they are looking for in those assessments, and although certainly not suggesting that this is the case with your child, they are good at spotting ‘raw’ ability..as opposed to children tutored to test. There’s a huge difference. Our daughter has never been a big reader, loathes writing..but is a natural at maths. So we were really surprised when she was offered a scholarship on the basis of high performance on ALL her papers. It turns out her English performance was so far from the usual ‘prepped polish’ that they often see, her raw ability simply shone through. Every school will have its own feelers on this, I’m sure your son will find his perfect place.

@mammmamia Spatial reasoning tests mental rotation ability and understanding position, 3D space etc.

Strong spatial reasoning skills are required for advanced STEM and mathematics. Pilots and engineers are examples of people who have strong spatial reasoning skills. You can improve spatial reasoning skills more easily than other forms of intelligence through training and practice.

Well we’ve learned the hard way that CAT scores and Atom scores do not necessarily mean success with the super selective. My son’s Yr5 and Yr6 CATS averaged 136. His Atom scores were 128-138. And yet he got flat no from SPS for 13+ and Habs for 11+ ... not even through to interview. He’s waitlisted for MTS (his ‘net’ school!!)
Fortunately he has an interview at Eton, which is our first choice in any case.
It’s been really hard to understand what happened! Clearly, despite having the intellectual horsepower, he is not suited to this system

Interested in this thread as my son has always scored low in spatial (105 ish) compared to the others which are 120+. This is based on his scores in year 5 and 6.
This drags his overall average down but I can’t understand what they’re trying to test with spatial. Is it very different from NVR? Do schools look at this score or are they more interested in the other 3 (as our head alluded)?
And what does a low spatial score in relation to the others say about him - does it reflect some kind of learning difficulty in one area?

@user149799568 - yes good point re the SEM on average, and that’s certainly something that some schools are more wary of. I know my daughter’s school were requested to provide consecutive year by year data on CATs, and her average across the 4 batteries ranged from 137 to 140. For 11plus county appeal however, I know from others, that they simply chose the best scores...or not at all, if there were none that added positive reflection! I’m sure there is a lot of manipulation on data with some schools, after all it’s in their best interests to secure a place for their students...but perhaps not always the right place for the child.

Bute house head this year got the girls all resitting their Yr6 CATs so she just have thought they could improve with practice?!!

Or that they're only going to report the second score if it's higher than the first.

The standard error of measurement of any one of the four component tests is 5 points. The SEM of the average of the four components is 3 points. That means that if a "truly average" child were able to take the test 20 times, you would expect them to record a 105 or higher average score one time and 95 or lower one time, so a 10 point spread between a good day and a bad day. Who knows how the very selective schools regard the difference between, say, a reported 117 average score and a 127.

@Schoolmummmy Just checked DSs Yr 5 CAT scores (I was doing it from memory) and you’re right the 123 score was for spacial. My point stands - and this was intended for panicky parents looking at this thread in future months - don’t worry about your kids scores too much as the schools will be able to spot natural ability if they can pass the first gate of ISEB. My son had no tutoring - in fact we came back from abroad during covid-19 - but with a couple of months prep on Atom he managed to pick up sufficiently to get offers from 1 super selective and 3 selectives. The Heads must think they are able to influence ‘natural ability’ shown by the CAT scores in some way, otherwise I don’t see why the head of Bute House (feeder for SPGS) would retest the girls in her 11+ cohort as they didn’t get the ‘right’ result first time?! In some prep schools they do ATOM practice ad nauseum so this does counter the ‘natural ability’ point somewhat. Over-tutoring sucks and drains the life out of the poor kids - but a bit of prep via exampapersplus (they have online Pretest papers you can buy) or ATOM (same sort of platform used by ISEB) will give them confidence and set them up for success. Some bright state school kids are missing out because they don’t get ‘the system’. I am only trying to help even the playing field and dispel the myth that any scores under 120 won’t lead to success. Good luck those embarking on the journey (I have no affiliation with either provider btw) x

Am surprised to hear all this talk about prepping for CATS...they are supposed to reflect ability / potential, and not meant to be prepared for. Our daughter certainly never encountered a cats type question, until she sat the actual tests. From year 3 to year 6, and all were consistently very high. She is extremely logical, and can work out patterns and spot links between things...very quickly. That’s what these tests are analysing, not how well a child has been prepped?! A friend took that approach with both her children, desperate to get them into good schools. And although their scores increased ‘slightly’..they were still never stellar. More mid teens average at a very hard push.
@LibbyGray - the current CATS comprise VR, NVR, spatial & maths....it doesn’t have an English battery as such. But either way, an ‘unprepared‘ average over 121 is good, and is generally considered the benchmark required for our local grammar. Which incidentally isn’t super-selective, but supposed to reflect top 1/3, although a lot of kids don’t make that CATS average, but pass the 11plus...because they have been heavily tutored.