CATs score in top schools

Hi

National average is 100
Prep average is 120
So depending on your school choice can be anything above 120 - 141.

It’s far from being an exact science though. For instance, I was shown in the computer each time one of mine was approaching 11 plus. One of my DDs had been getting 141 Quite a lot over the years.. She got into SPGS and G&L but not LU because she messed up the paper in the day and she knew she had.,Another was getting 130- 135 in some areas sometimes (not all), he got into LU but I was told he wouldn’t get into KCS or SPS because they’d was only about ten places at each at 11 plus (this was a few years back, I know KCS has widened its entry since then). Despite high CAT scores, there were speed processing issues for this DS. The LU comprehension suited him because, although tricky, it was multi choice. So there’s other considerations apart from CAT scores that will affect where they get offers. Some of the most able DC in particular areas can have have spiky profiles - eg if you’re 141 in maths but only average in English this won’t be enough. Plus there are some very bright 141 plus, yet introverted children, who may struggle at an interview, while those with slightly lower CAT scores may just excel more in that kind of area. They also take into account references and other skills - music, sports etc.

Hi OP. I can only tell you what the head at our prep told me last year. Firstly, there is a 5 mark “margin of error” with CAT tests, so you have to factor this in. However, they are in the business of guiding children into the “right” schools year after year. They track CAT scores from reception and what they generally find is this -

SPGS, SPS, G&L, LU & Westminster - you need to be 132 plus on average. SPGS particularly, more like 135.

Hampton, LEH and WHS - about 128-130. Not because they are less academic once you get in, but just because the Central London schools are more competitive entry due to numbers applying.

PHS and KGS - about 125.

Ibstock etc I can’t remember, but slightly lower.

So yes, It’s crazy and it’s a bubble. Averages in SW London are totally skewed and if you’re not in the top 2% nationally, you will not get into the SPS, KCS, G&L,or LUs etc. Hundreds of children who are at this level, CAT score-wise, will not get in anyway, even though they do more than adequately in the exams / interviews because there simply aren’t enough places to take all the DC who would actually cope well in these schools. This is why you have to sit 5 schools to raise the odds.

Interested to know the latest views on this thread, which is a couple of years old: what kind of CAT4 scores would be considered suitable for admission to highly selective senior schools?

Cakeisalwaystheanswer - I loved your Westminster description

V interesting Wombat, thanks. There are so many schools to choose from around here, before you even consider the independents! Obviously great to have lots of possible options, but also makes it a really hard decision (particularly as you don't know which ones you'll actually get offered a place from).

You're be talking about high CAT scores for the top super selective Kent Grammars too. Remember the huge numbers who apply because the schools are free, which make them hugely competitive. On an applications per place basis, they will be more competitive than the independents which simply have less applicants because of fees.

Yes, consider SevenOaks - you might get a scholarship, but it's worth remembering that most scholarships are not worth much money now and unless you qualify for a means tested bursary, you will have to pay most of the fees, unlike the Grammars.

I actually think that most of these selective independents take a wider range of ability (measured by CATs or other methods) than people sometimes think. It is definitely in a schools interest to push the idea that very high CATs are required and I'm sure that high levels are, but probably not at the levels mentioned. These schools have more applicants than places, but the kids who apply also apply to a number of schools and can only take up one place. We all know that schools make more offers than places because not everyone will come - those who get offers might range from the top 141 score for a number of students, down to a fairly significantly lower score at the bottom of the offers list, simply because they need to fill their places and only have a certain number of applicants who can afford to pay the fees.

If you speak to the teachers in these schools, you will hear that yes, the students are really bright....but there is still a range and some are not as clever as others.....but they got in. Every school has those who struggle a bit to keep up with the high expectations - who are at risk of a B or C at GCSE or A Level, rather than the A*. I know that these grades don't correlate with CATs but the point is that although all abilities might be high, they are not all super-high as is suggested by some people.

It is good to be guided by Preps are CAT indications are useful. However, I would say that with scores of 120+ its possible to have a go anywhere. And Inwouldnt be at all surprised if those top schools have a handful of students who are actually more like the 110-120 CAT mark too. Great schools can get all A/A* out of students with 105-115 as well those with the higher scores. And I know it's not all about exam results and high CATS might indicate abilities not measured by GCSE or A Level, but schools are still very very interested in these grades.

Hadn't thought about it until v recently!! Had always assumed he would go to a Kent grammar (assuming he passes 11+), but recently we've been looking at Sevenoaks too, as I love the IB and the co-ed. I hadn't thought about any other selectives, but his CAT scores make me wonder whether he might be a scholarship candidate elsewhere, and whether that's something we ought to be looking at. The thing about state primaries (and this isn't a criticism at all) is that they're not focused on children 'getting in' to particular secondary schools, so it just hasn't particularly been on our radar, whereas I guess it probably would already have been discussed with us at a prep.

Smart boy, well done to your son, Witch.

Have you any plans to sit him for a selective school?

Wow, ok, thanks. He got 141 on two of the four papers, so maybe I should have said a bit more than 'well done, darling' .

I just looked at my son's, and it appears that the 'overall' is a straightforward average of the 4, although confusingly, his is off by 1.

I recall, perhaps incorrectly, from my eldest that extremely high individual scores will carry more weight in the calculation, although that doesn't seem to be the case with the most recent one for my youngest.

Anything above 130 is considered 'exceptional'. I believe the maximum score is 141.

Hope that helps.

My son (Y5 state primary) has just done CATs, and we've been given the results but I'm not quite sure how to interpret them. People here are talking about one score but we've just been given four individual paper scores - are you just taking an average to get one score? Do they all do the same test at the same age, or does the school choose the level? And what's the maximum score??

My reply was general for the top schools but for Westminster alone 135+ wouldn't surprise me. Its different to other schools except possibly Winchester and treading very delicately attracts quirky, exceedingly bright boys. It doesn't have a rugby team.

Ds will be applying for a local international school early next year that test using Cat tests .Given that a test a year ago showed underlying abilities of 130 - if he practices how much will he be able to improve?
Or this that a piece of string question?
His school have given us some practice tests but Ds reckons he has enough homework ( for common entrance) as it is.

Argh - why would someone need to take CATs every year.

But why would you prepare for CATS - I only knew after the fact that they had been taken, and they were only given once in Year 6 to make sure that the senior school was still a good fit for the boys as there is no additional entry exam for the junior school boys. I don't believe they are administered by the target senior schools, but by the preps to guide parents on appropriate schools to target so prepping for them seems strange to me.

Why would someone CATs need to take every year? just curious.

However, I would say the 11+ intake at WUS is very selective but at 7+ or 13+ may be selective in a different way ie CE scores would be known at 13+ for example and there is only a fairly basic test at 7+ so they may take children in then who turn out to be not so able later.

The CE scores aren't known at 13+, the 13+ offers are conditional upon the CE. My understanding is that the 11+ entry is the more difficult than 13+, this may be because more sit the 13+, but they're both ferociously competitive.

Re; preparation for CATS, yes I think you can boost a score with GL/CEM prep and work on speed.

When we visited Westminster Under one year, a parent asked about CAT scores during the Open Day. The Master said they were looking in the region of 135+. They take the top scorers from the pre-tests through to the next rounds so there are plenty of boys that score this. I'm assuming the pre tests are like CATS from the feedback ds gave me. My ds sat CATS from Year 3-6 and consistently scored 140+ across the board in all years. This is not to boast but to illustrate that the schools are perhaps looking for truly able children.

However, I would say the 11+ intake at WUS is very selective but at 7+ or 13+ may be selective in a different way ie CE scores would be known at 13+ for example and there is only a fairly basic test at 7+ so they may take children in then who turn out to be not so able later.

The Senior school's ask for reports from primary school so can probably weed out those whose scores suddenly shoot up in Year 6 due to prior tutoring perhaps?

Incidentally, there was a programme on a while ago about boys applying for a foundation scholarship at Harrow. They sat CATS tests initially and there was a glimpse at the paper scores. All who got through to the next round scored 139+ but I suppose they needed to be at scholarship level to be considered.

A question - CAT has been not really used around these parts. Can you prepare for it in the way people prepare for 11+/CEM/GL etc.?

A Mumsnet Colet Court parent said the school recommended 125+ for progressing to St Paul’s and that below that they’d struggle.

Also, I’ve heard that Harrow will take a boy of IQ 125 minimum if they are very talented in other areas.

I have also read as a vague guideline that the CAT score required is roughly double the CE pass mark. So 55% CE = CAT 110, 60% = CAT 120, 65% =130. Which mostly sounds realistic to me. But then when you get up to 70% CE for Eton & St Paul’s / Westminster it’s very hard to believe that is 140+ CAT. I cant believe even Winchester would ask for 140+! Though maybe @HappyGardening could comment?

I disagree that we can tell much from numbers alone. Doesnt the top 2% get 130+ idea come from distribution of scores for IQ tests which are not prepared for, so wouldn’t a CAT test / IQ Test / Common Entrance for which children are heavily tutored mean that more than 2% are getting 130+ due to the tutoring? In addition to the tutoring, demographics skew things as well; there are a lot of wealthy and well resourced families from all over the world living in London and going for these schools. So already there are greater than normal numbers of high IQ children.

I knew my logic was flawed but equally running the numbers tells us that 135 is ludicrously high.

But to the point of whether the group is all top quartile, I have to disagree. Preps repeatedly say that they can predict where the kids will end up getting offers but parents ignore their advice and enter them for schools out of their league. People quote the "1 stretch school, 1 solid chance, 1 banker" and take the stretch school a little too far.

Possibly common entrance is where this doesn't happen as the multiple offers scenario doesn't come up. Not my area of experience at all..

Moninatrix- that comment about Eton and Westminster sounds like sour grapes! I hope it wasn't a friend..

FanDabbyFloozy,

I agree that 130 would be too high.

However, your numbers assume that the 600 hundred applicants for your top selective school are representative of the entire age cohort countrywide. That will not be the case. Surely, you are not going to get many children below the upper quartile applying?

If 2% of the population score 130 in standardised tests, you can see that's too high because most children will apply to 3+ schools so won't necessarily take the school even if offered.
Say there are 600 applicants which is about right for the top London independent schools. If 130 is the cutoff, then only 12 would get offers - way too low a number even allowing for a self-selecting bright group who decide to apply.

I can't agree with your logic here, the average profile of a child who sits for Westminster for example is already well above average since their head will have made attempts to prevent those who don't have a fighting chance from sitting the exam.

CATS are meant to be a proxy for IQ, so by all means a school like Westminster is going to be looking in the 130+ range. Whether the CATS exam is actually a good measure is up for debate, both of my kids have said it's outrageously easy compared to computer-based school entrance exams which to me suggests it may not effectively separate the merely bright from the exceptional.