Results for 2011
Here are the results of the round 1 tests (at Advanced and Foundation levels). First, some participation figures:
- Foundation: 390 pupils from 15 schools (compare 2010: 197 pupils from 14 schools). 188 were boys, 163 were girls, and 47 were unclassifiable from our data.
- Advanced: 833 pupils from 52 schools (compare 2010: 406 candidates from 36 schools). 384 were boys, 448 were girls.
The M/F figures show that Foundation level entries tend (slightly) to be boys, and Advanced entries tend strongly to be girls.
The paper was marked out of 46, the best mark was 40 and the mean was 19. In other words, the typical participant could cope with just under half the questions. That must be quite daunting and discouraging. The figure below summarises the national picture.
The figure shows clearly how hard the youngest pupils, in Year 7 and Year 8, found the questions. Our hope is that over the years the youngsters will improve their scores in Foundation papers and then move on to the Advanced paper, but there’s a risk that these scores will put them off. Comments please! Maybe we need to include an even easier level next year. Conversely, anyone with a score over 30 this year should certainly consider the Advanced level next year.
It is worth pointing out that 158 of these 390 pupils – i.e. almost half – took the test in teams. This is fine by us, but of course the Advanced competition is for individuals so it would probably be wise to encourage pupils to take the Foundation paper as individuals before tackling the Advanced level. We could explore the statistical effects of working in teams, but there’s not much point in it because team and individual competitors probably differ in many other ways.
The paper was marked out of 65, the best score was 59 and the mean score was 32 – i.e. just under 50%. In other words, the typical participant could answer nearly half the questions – not bad at all, especially considering how young some of them were. The figure summarises the national picture. Age is clearly an advantage, especially in the top scores. But it doesn’t guarantee a high score!
We selected the best seventeen candidates (our target was sixteen, but one has other pressing commitments which prevent him from attending round 2). Here they are, listed in purely alphabetical order.
- Ardavan Afshar, Winchester College
- Rick Bartoldus, The American School in London
- Piotr Galuszka, Worth School, Turners Hill
- Helen Hambling, Stephen Perse Foundation, Cambridge
- Jessica Hao, Westminster School, London
- Rory Heaton, Manchester Grammar School
- Olivia Lalude-Haworth, Queen EGS Blackburn
- Jake Lishman, All Saints R C School, York
- Lewis Lloyd, Dulwich College, London
- Sacha Mehta, Westminster School, London
- Nicholas Moore, John Leggott College, Scunthorpe
- Shreya Nanda, City of London School for Girls
- Julia Payne, Stephen Perse Foundation, Cambridge
- Younus Porteous, Westminster School, London
- Luke Sullivan, Dulwich College, London
- Sophy Tuck, Stephen Perse Foundation, Cambridge
- Thomas White, Winchester College (can’t attend round 2)
We congratulate them all on a spectacularly good performance. The top mark was 59/65 and the threshold was 54.
All the above took part in Round 2 in Edinburgh (25-27 March). Here’s a picture of them at work and a group picture. Click either for a higher-quality picture.
Looking jolly. (Left-right)
All sixteen performed at a predictably high standard, so it was very hard to choose the winning four:
- Piotr Galuszka
- Jessica Hao
- Jake Lishman
- Nick Moore
Congratulations to them all! These four will form the UK team which Neil Sheldon will lead to the International Linguistics Olympiad in Pittsburgh, USA, at the end of July. We wish them all good luck and much success.
International Linguistics Olympiad
For our two awards, click here.