www.gl-assessment.co.

uk/catdigital

Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT) Digital SCOTLAND sample reports

s
Include ed
ha c
n
new en ing
report

1
Contents
SCOTLAND
SAMPLE REPORTS PAGE

Standard Report - Group Demographic Comparison NEW 3 Cognitive Abilities Test

Standard Report - Group Demographic Comparison Graphs NEW 4
(CAT) Digital
Standard Report - CAT Verbal Reasoning Test - Mean score and Stanine distribution NEW 5

Standard Report - Pupils’ CAT scores listed by Surname 6 CAT Digital is an onscreen version of GL Assessment’s
popular Cognitive Abilities Test. It measures the three
CAT Individual Pupil Profile - Individual pupil CAT profile 7 principal areas of reasoning – verbal, non-verbal and
numerical – as well as an element of spatial ability,
Subtest Report – Pupils subtest raw scores listed by Surname 8
allowing teachers to test the full range within an entire
Subtest Reports - Pupils’ subtest standardised scores listed by Surname 9 class or year.

The rich data provided can be used to enhance all aspects

Scottish Standard Grade indicators with profiles
of the teaching and learning process, form ongoing classes
- Group summary of Scottish Standard Grade indicators 10
to predicting future educational attainment. It helps identify
Scottish Standard Grade indicators with profiles pupil’s strengths, needs and learning preferences and
- Pupils’ Scottish Standard Grade indicators listed by Surname 11 informs target-setting and the development of individual
learning plans. Standardise scores allow you to compare
Scottish Standard Grade indicators with profiles your pupils’ results with the national average.
- Pupils’ Intermediate Grade indicators listed by Surname 12
Note: Pupil listings can be sorted by Surname or by First
Scottish Standard Grade Indicators with profiles - Individual pupils’ Standard Grade Profiles 13 name or by merit order based on Standard Age Scores.

Scottish Standard Grade Indicators with profiles - Individual pupils’ Intermediate Grade profiles 14
New Enhanced Reports
Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses Profile
- Explanation of the Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses Profile report 15 Our digital products now come with additional enhanced
reporting as standard. These provide more powerful and
Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses Profile flexible insights into test results and include reports such as:
- Group Summary of Strength/Weakness Profiles listed by Surname 16
• Group Demographic Comparisons
Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses Profile - Visual-Verbal Profile Chart 17 Reports are available by class, year group, schools, cluster
of schools or by authority.
CAT Digital Group Visual - Verbal Learning Profile 18
Speak to your area consultant for more details.
Case Study - Online Testing at Weald of Kent Grammar School 19

2
CAT Group Demographic Comparison Section A

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Number Mean Standard Age Scores Mean Raw Scores

of pupils Overall CAT Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal
All Students 32 99.8 101.2 96.9 101.6 46.9 34.2 39.2
Females 12 100.9 101.8 93.7 107.4 46.1 32.2 43.1
Gender
Males 20 99.2 100.8 98.8 98.2 47.5 35.5 37.0
White 19 104.6 105.3 102.7 106.1 52.3 40.0 43.6
Ethnic Group Black 9 92.3 93.7 89.7 93.9 38.2 26.9 32.4
Asian 4 94.0 98.8 85.8 97.8 41.0 23.5 33.8
No 26 106.8 106.3 103.9 110.2 53.1 40.5 46.9
Free School Meals
Yes 6 69.8 79.2 66.5 64.7 20.3 7.3 6.2
None 27 105.7 105.2 103.2 108.7 51.7 39.7 45.5
Special Education School Action 3 70.3 80.3 65.0 66.7 22.3 5.3 7.3
School Action Plus 2 65.5 78.5 59.5 59.0 19.0 3.5 2.5
EE2 2EE 11 101.7 100.5 97.9 107.0 46.5 34.5 43.1
EE3 3EE 9 90.4 94.9 88.4 88.3 39.2 25.6 26.8
Custom 1
EE1 1EE 8 106.2 105.8 104.6 108.5 53.5 42.8 47.0
EE4 4EE 4 103.0 108.5 97.8 103.0 52.2 36.0 41.2

Number of pupils is based upon the Overall CAT score.

© GL Assessment 2008

3
CAT Group Demographic Comparison Graphs Section A

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Number Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal

of pupils 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

All Students 32
Females 12
Gender
Males 20
White 19
Ethnic Group Black 9
Asian 4
No 26
Free School Meals
Yes 6
None 27
Special Education School Action 3
School Action Plus 2
EE2 2EE 11
EE3 3EE 9
Custom 1
EE1 1EE 8
EE4 4EE 4

Number of pupils is based upon the Overall CAT score.

© GL Assessment 2008

4
CAT CAT Verbal Reasoning Test - Mean score and Stanine distribution Section B
School: Sample School CAT Level: C
Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32
Verbal
Stand. Age Scores Percentage of students in each Stanine

5
Mean SD N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
National 100.0 15.0 4 7 12 17 20 17 12 7 4
All Students 101.2 19.1 32 3 9 19 19 3 25 0 9 12
Females 101.8 20.0 12 0 17 25 8 0 25 0 8 17
Gender
Males 100.8 17.5 20 5 5 15 25 5 25 0 10 10
White 105.3 17.2 19 0 0 16 26 0 32 0 16 11
Ethnic Group Black 93.7 17.8 9 0 33 22 11 0 22 0 0 11
Asian 98.8 20.0 4 25 0 25 0 25 0 0 0 25
No 106.3 17.4 26 0 4 12 23 4 31 0 12 15
Free Meals
Yes 79.2 10.0 6 17 33 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
None 105.2 18.0 27 0 7 11 22 4 30 0 11 15
Special School Action 80.3 10.0 3 33 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0
School Action Plus 78.5 10.0 2 0 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
EE2 2EE 100.5 17.6 11 0 18 18 0 9 45 0 0 9
EE3 3EE 94.9 20.0 9 11 11 33 11 0 11 0 11 11
Custom 1
EE1 1EE 105.8 17.7 8 0 0 0 50 0 25 0 12 12
EE4 4EE 108.5 20.0 4 0 0 25 25 0 0 0 25 25
Key: N - Number of students, SD - Standard Deviation.
© GL Assessment 2008
CAT Pupils' CAT scores listed by Surname Section C

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Mean CAT Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal

Pupil Name Date of Test SAS GR RS SAS ST NPR GR RS SAS ST NPR GR RS SAS ST NPR GR
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-2009 93 20 32 88 3 22 23 24 88 3 22 21 45 103 5 58 16
Jackie Blair 05-05-2009 64 32 15 75 2 5 31 2 59 1 1 30 5 59 1 1 30
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-2009 131 2 71 123 8 94 5 57 130 9 98 1 65 141 9 99 1
William Browne 05-05-2009 93 23 41 94 4 34 17 24 88 3 22 21 36 96 4 40 21
Dave Browne 05-05-2009 100 15 54 104 6 60 15 37 99 5 48 17 38 97 5 42 19
Michael Chung 05-05-2009 72 28 13 72 1 3 32 13 77 2 6 27 9 68 1 2 29
Alastair Clifton 05-05-2009 93 20 40 92 4 30 20 39 100 5 50 16 26 87 3 20 23
Gordon Dawes 05-05-2009 93 20 39 92 4 30 20 28 90 4 26 20 39 97 5 42 19
Natasha Gill 05-05-2009 119 8 58 107 6 68 10 48 110 6 74 10 64 140 9 99 2
Ruth Grant 05-05-2009 98 16 39 92 4 30 20 36 97 5 42 19 46 104 6 60 15
Jimmy Hills 05-05-2009 67 31 23 82 3 12 27 5 60 1 1 29 0 59 1 1 30
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-2009 96 19 43 94 4 34 17 38 99 5 48 17 36 95 4 37 22
Gary Jameson 05-05-2009 128 4 76 139 9 99 2 54 120 8 91 5 60 126 8 96 6
Roger Jones 05-05-2009 84 24 29 86 3 18 24 22 86 3 18 24 17 80 2 9 26
John Kennedy 05-05-2009 67 30 26 84 3 14 26 0 59 1 1 30 1 59 1 1 30
Tony Mathwes 05-05-2009 123 5 73 127 9 96 4 53 117 7 87 7 60 126 8 96 6
Neil Moss 05-05-2009 107 14 60 107 6 68 10 47 108 6 70 12 49 107 6 68 12
Peter Murdi 05-05-2009 98 16 41 94 4 34 17 39 101 5 53 15 39 98 5 45 18
John Nash 05-05-2009 120 7 62 111 6 77 8 55 122 8 93 2 61 128 9 97 5
Diane Peron 05-05-2009 129 3 77 141 9 99 1 55 121 8 92 4 60 125 8 95 9
Ken Reagan 05-05-2009 114 9 58 107 6 68 10 55 122 8 93 2 53 113 7 80 11
Mary Roberts 05-05-2009 82 25 20 80 2 9 29 16 81 2 11 26 23 85 3 16 24
Sarah Robson 05-05-2009 72 28 28 85 3 16 25 3 59 1 1 30 12 73 1 4 27
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-2009 75 27 23 82 3 12 27 6 63 1 1 28 18 81 2 11 25
Nina Sharma 05-05-2009 132 1 76 139 9 99 2 52 116 7 86 8 64 140 9 99 2
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-2009 97 18 52 102 5 55 16 23 87 3 20 23 44 102 5 55 17
James Thomas 05-05-2009 113 11 62 111 6 77 8 54 120 8 91 5 48 107 6 68 12
Margaret Thompson 05-05-2009 112 12 59 107 6 68 10 49 110 6 74 10 57 119 8 90 10
Peter Tucker 05-05-2009 77 26 17 77 2 6 30 21 85 3 16 25 10 70 1 2 28
David Vincents 05-05-2009 111 13 69 119 8 90 7 45 107 6 68 14 48 107 6 68 12
Tessa Watt 05-05-2009 113 10 55 105 6 63 14 46 108 6 70 12 60 126 8 96 6
Mary Whittaker 05-05-2009 122 6 71 121 8 92 6 50 112 7 78 9 63 134 9 99 4

© GL Assessment 2008

6
CAT Individual pupil CAT profile Section D

School: Sample School Pupil Name: Shirley Aransiola CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Age: 10:02 Date of Test: 05-05-2009
Sex: Female

Battery Raw Score SAS ST NPR Standard Age Score with 90% Confidence Bands

VERBAL
(53 questions attempted)
32 88 3 22

QUANTITATIVE
(43 questions attempted)
24 88 3 22

NON-VERBAL
(53 questions attempted)
45 103 5 58

The overall mean SAS for all batteries taken is 93. Individual performance on each
battery taken shows that this pupil is below average on Verbal Reasoning, below average
on Quantitative Reasoning, about average on Non-Verbal Reasoning.

Key:
SAS - Standard Age Score
ST - Stanine
NPR - National Percentile Rank
! - Chance level raw score

Note:
A pupil's SAS scores are only an estimate of true ability as performance on any one occasion can be affected by a number of factors such as mood, illness etc. So, on
another day, the same pupil could get a different score. Statistical methods can be used to estimate the range of scores within which you can be 90% sure that the pupil's
true score lies.

© GL Assessment 2009

7
CAT Pupils' subtest raw scores listed by Surname Section A

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Verbal (Raw Scores) Quantitative (Raw Scores) Non-Verbal (Raw Scores)

Number V1 V2 V3 Total Number Q1 Q2 Q3 Total Number N1 N2 N3 Total
Pupil Name Date of Test Attempted(78) (24) (24) (30) (78) Attempted(58) (20) (20) (18) (58) Attempted(66) (24) (24) (18) (66)
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-2009 53 24 8 0 32 43 20 4 0 24 53 24 21 0 45
Jackie Blair 05-05-2009 46 15 0 0 15 19 2 0 0 2 36 5 0 0 5
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-2009 74 24 24 23 71 57 20 20 17 57 65 24 24 17 65
William Browne 05-05-2009 53 24 17 0 41 45 20 4 0 24 47 24 12 0 36
Dave Browne 05-05-2009 66 24 24 6 54 49 20 17 0 37 53 24 14 0 38
Michael Chung 05-05-2009 42 13 0 0 13 43 13 0 0 13 39 9 0 0 9
Alastair Clifton 05-05-2009 56 24 16 0 40 47 20 19 0 39 41 24 2 0 26
Gordon Dawes 05-05-2009 63 24 15 0 39 43 20 8 0 28 53 24 15 0 39
Natasha Gill 05-05-2009 69 24 24 10 58 54 20 20 8 48 65 24 24 16 64
Ruth Grant 05-05-2009 61 24 15 0 39 47 20 16 0 36 56 24 22 0 46
Jimmy Hills 05-05-2009 51 23 0 0 23 26 5 0 0 5 31 0 0 0 0
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-2009 55 24 19 0 43 47 20 18 0 38 45 24 12 0 36
Gary Jameson 05-05-2009 77 24 24 28 76 57 20 20 14 54 64 24 24 12 60
Roger Jones 05-05-2009 54 24 5 0 29 33 20 2 0 22 47 17 0 0 17
John Kennedy 05-05-2009 53 24 2 0 26 27 0 0 0 0 30 1 0 0 1
Tony Mathwes 05-05-2009 75 24 24 25 73 57 20 20 13 53 64 24 24 12 60
Neil Moss 05-05-2009 69 24 24 12 60 50 20 20 7 47 58 24 24 1 49
Peter Murdi 05-05-2009 63 24 17 0 41 50 20 19 0 39 53 24 15 0 39
John Nash 05-05-2009 68 24 24 14 62 56 20 20 15 55 63 24 24 13 61
Diane Peron 05-05-2009 78 24 24 29 77 57 20 20 15 55 61 24 24 12 60
Ken Reagan 05-05-2009 70 24 24 10 58 57 20 20 15 55 58 24 24 5 53
Mary Roberts 05-05-2009 46 20 0 0 20 36 16 0 0 16 39 23 0 0 23
Sarah Robson 05-05-2009 48 24 4 0 28 30 3 0 0 3 41 12 0 0 12
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-2009 54 23 0 0 23 30 6 0 0 6 44 18 0 0 18
Nina Sharma 05-05-2009 78 24 24 28 76 57 20 20 12 52 65 24 24 16 64
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-2009 68 24 24 4 52 38 20 3 0 23 54 24 20 0 44
James Thomas 05-05-2009 70 24 24 14 62 55 20 20 14 54 55 24 24 0 48
Margaret Thompson 05-05-2009 69 24 24 11 59 55 20 20 9 49 62 24 24 9 57
Peter Tucker 05-05-2009 47 17 0 0 17 39 20 1 0 21 36 10 0 0 10
David Vincents 05-05-2009 74 24 24 21 69 50 20 20 5 45 54 24 24 0 48
Tessa Watt 05-05-2009 67 24 24 7 55 53 20 20 6 46 62 24 24 12 60
Mary Whittaker 05-05-2009 74 24 24 23 71 56 20 20 10 50 66 24 24 15 63

© GL Assessment 2009

8
CAT Pupils' subtest standardised scores listed by Surname Section B

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal Overall

Stanines Stanines Stanines Mean
Pupil Name Date of Test V1 V2 V3 Total SAS NPR GR Q1 Q2 Q3 Total SAS NPR GR N1 N2 N3 Total SAS NPR GR SAS GR
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-2009 9 3 1 3 88 22 23 8+ 2 1 3 88 22 21= 9 7 1 5 103 58 16 93 20=
Jackie Blair 05-05-2009 4 1 1 2 75 5 31 1 1 1 1 59 1 30= 2 1 1 1 59 1 30= 64 32
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-2009 9 9 6 8 123 94 5 8+ 9 7 9 130 98 1 9 9 8 9 141 99 1 131 2
William Browne 05-05-2009 9 6 1 4 94 34 17= 8+ 2 1 3 88 22 21= 9 4 1 4 96 40 21 93 20=
Dave Browne 05-05-2009 9 9 2 6 104 60 15 8+ 6 1 5 99 48 17= 9 5 1 5 97 42 19= 100 15
Michael Chung 05-05-2009 4 1 1 1 72 3 32 5 1 1 2 77 6 27 3 1 1 1 68 2 29 72 28=
Alastair Clifton 05-05-2009 9 5 1 4 92 30 20= 8+ 8 1 5 100 50 16 9 1 1 3 87 20 23 93 20=
Gordon Dawes 05-05-2009 9 5 1 4 92 30 20= 8+ 3 1 4 90 26 20 9 5 1 5 97 42 19= 93 20=
Natasha Gill 05-05-2009 9 9 3 6 107 68 10= 8+ 9 4 6 110 74 10= 9 9 8 9 140 99 2= 119 8
Ruth Grant 05-05-2009 9 5 1 4 92 30 20= 8+ 6 1 5 97 42 19 9 8 1 6 104 60 15 98 16=
Jimmy Hills 05-05-2009 8 1 1 3 82 12 27= 3 1 1 1 60 1 29 1 1 1 1 59 1 30= 67 30=
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-2009 9 6 1 4 94 34 17= 8+ 7 1 5 99 48 17= 9 4 1 4 95 37 22 96 19
Gary Jameson 05-05-2009 9 9 8 9 139 99 2= 8+ 9 6 8 120 91 5= 9 9 6 8 126 96 6= 128 4
Roger Jones 05-05-2009 9 2 1 3 86 18 24 8+ 1 1 3 86 18 24 5 1 1 2 80 9 26 84 24
John Kennedy 05-05-2009 9 1 1 3 84 14 26 1 1 1 1 59 1 30= 1 1 1 1 59 1 30= 67 30=
Tony Mathwes 05-05-2009 9 9 7 9 127 96 4 8+ 9 5 7 117 87 7 9 9 6 8 126 96 6= 123 5
Neil Moss 05-05-2009 9 9 4 6 107 68 10= 8+ 9 4 6 108 70 12= 9 9 1 6 107 68 12= 107 14
Peter Murdi 05-05-2009 9 6 1 4 94 34 17= 8+ 8 1 5 101 52 15 9 5 1 5 98 45 18 98 16=
John Nash 05-05-2009 9 9 4 6 111 77 8= 8+ 9 6 8 122 93 2= 9 9 6 9 128 97 5 120 7
Diane Peron 05-05-2009 9 9 9 9 141 99 1 8+ 9 6 8 121 92 4 9 9 6 8 125 95 9 129 3
Ken Reagan 05-05-2009 9 9 3 6 107 68 10= 8+ 9 6 8 122 93 2= 9 9 3 7 113 80 11 114 9
Mary Roberts 05-05-2009 6 1 1 2 80 9 29 6 1 1 2 81 11 26 8 1 1 3 85 16 24 82 25
Sarah Robson 05-05-2009 9 2 1 3 85 16 25 2 1 1 1 59 1 30= 4 1 1 1 73 4 27 72 28=
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-2009 8 1 1 3 82 12 27= 3 1 1 1 63 1 28 6 1 1 2 81 11 25 75 27
Nina Sharma 05-05-2009 9 9 8 9 139 99 2= 8+ 9 5 7 116 86 8 9 9 8 9 140 99 2= 132 1
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-2009 9 9 2 5 102 55 16 8+ 2 1 3 87 20 23 9 7 1 5 102 55 17 97 18
James Thomas 05-05-2009 9 9 4 6 111 77 8= 8+ 9 6 8 120 91 5= 9 9 1 6 107 68 12= 113 10=
Margaret Thompson 05-05-2009 9 9 3 6 107 68 10= 8+ 9 4 6 110 74 10= 9 9 5 8 119 90 10 112 12
Peter Tucker 05-05-2009 5 1 1 2 77 6 30 8+ 1 1 3 85 16 25 4 1 1 1 70 2 28 77 26
David Vincents 05-05-2009 9 9 6 8 119 90 7 8+ 9 3 6 107 68 14 9 9 1 6 107 68 12= 111 13
Tessa Watt 05-05-2009 9 9 2 6 105 63 14 8+ 9 3 6 108 70 12= 9 9 6 8 126 96 6= 113 10=
Mary Whittaker 05-05-2009 9 9 6 8 121 92 6 8+ 9 4 7 112 78 9 9 9 7 9 134 99 4 122 6

© GL Assessment 2009

9
CAT Group summary of Scottish Standard Grade indicators Section A

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Percentage of pupils expected to achieve: Boys Girls All pupils

5 or more passes at SCQF Level 5 40.7% 48.8% 43.7%
5 or more passes at SCQF Level 4 75.6% 72.4% 74.4%
5 or more passes at SCQF Level 3 90.7% 88.5% 89.9%
Unified Points Score 189.2 196.7 192.0
Number of pupils 20 12 32

Percentage of pupils expected to achieve five or more passes at Scottish Credit and Qualification Framework (SCQF) Levels

5 or more passes at SCQF Level 5 5 or more passes at SCQF Level 4 5 or more passes at SCQF Level 3

© GL Assessment 2009

10
CAT Pupils' Scottish Standard Grade indicators listed by Surname Section B

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Verbal Mean
Pupil Name Date of Test SAS SAS
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-09 88 93 4 3/4 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 4 3/4 3/4 3 4 3/4 2/3 3 3/4 3/4 3 4 12% 78% 96% 162
Jackie Blair 05-05-09 75 64 6 6 4/5 6 5/6 5 5/6 4/5 5/6 4 4/5 6 4/5 5/6 5/6 4/5 6/7 6 4/5 4/5 4/5 5/6 4 6/7 0% 12% 48% 36
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-09 123 131 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1/2 1/2 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 100%100%100% 328
William Browne 05-05-09 94 93 4 3/4 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 3 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 4 3/4 2/3 3 3/4 3/4 3 4 12% 78% 96% 162
Dave Browne 05-05-09 104 100 3/4 3 2/3 2/3 3 3 3 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 3 2/3 3 2/3 2/3 3/4 2/3 2 2/3 3 3 2/3 3/4 28% 91% 99% 193
Michael Chung 05-05-09 72 72 5/6 5/6 4 5/6 5 4/5 5 4 4/5 4 4/5 5/6 5 5 5 4 6 5/6 4 4 4/5 5 4 6 1% 21% 65% 71
Alastair Clifton 05-05-09 92 93 4 3/4 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 3 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 4 3/4 2/3 3 3/4 3/4 3 4 12% 78% 96% 162
Gordon Dawes 05-05-09 92 93 4 3/4 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 3 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 4 3/4 2/3 3 3/4 3/4 3 4 12% 78% 96% 162
Natasha Gill 05-05-09 107 119 1/2 1/2 2 1 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2/3 2/3 1/2 2/3 1/2 1 1/2 1/2 1 1 1/2 1/2 2/3 1/2 1/2 93% 100%100% 275
Ruth Grant 05-05-09 92 98 3/4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2/3 3 3/4 3 3/4 3 3 2/3 3/4 3 2 2/3 3 3 2/3 3/4 22% 89% 98% 184
Jimmy Hills 05-05-09 82 67 5/6 6 4/5 5/6 5/6 5 5/6 4/5 5 3/4 4 6 4 5/6 5/6 4/5 6/7 5/6 4/5 4 4/5 5/6 4 6/7 1% 15% 54% 49
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-09 94 96 3/4 3 3 3 3 3 3/4 3 2/3 3 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3 2/3 4 3 2/3 2/3 3 3/4 2/3 4 17% 85% 97% 175
Gary Jameson 05-05-09 139 128 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2/3 1 1/2 99% 100%100% 315
Roger Jones 05-05-09 86 84 5 4/5 3/4 4/5 4 4 4/5 3/4 3/4 3/4 4 4/5 4 4/5 4 3/4 5 4 3 3/4 4 4 3/4 5 4% 51% 88% 123
John Kennedy 05-05-09 84 67 5/6 6 4/5 5/6 5/6 5 5/6 4/5 5 3/4 4 6 4 5/6 5/6 4/5 6/7 5/6 4/5 4 4/5 5/6 4 6/7 1% 15% 54% 49
Tony Mathwes 05-05-09 127 123 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1/2 1 1/2 1 1 1/2 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1/2 1 2/3 1 1/2 97% 100%100% 293
Neil Moss 05-05-09 107 107 2/3 2 2/3 2 2 2 2/3 2/3 2 2/3 2/3 2 2/3 2/3 2 2 2/3 2 1/2 2 2 3 2 2/3 57% 97% 100% 223
Peter Murdi 05-05-09 94 98 3/4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2/3 3 3/4 3 3/4 3 3 2/3 3/4 3 2 2/3 3 3 2/3 3/4 22% 89% 98% 184
John Nash 05-05-09 111 120 1 1/2 1/2 1 1 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2 2 1/2 2 1/2 1 1/2 1 1 1 1/2 1 2/3 1 1/2 95% 100%100% 280
Diane Peron 05-05-09 141 129 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2/3 1 1 99% 100%100% 319
Ken Reagan 05-05-09 107 114 1/2 1/2 2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2 1/2 2/3 2/3 1/2 2/3 2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2/3 1/2 2 83% 99% 100% 254
Mary Roberts 05-05-09 80 82 5 4/5 3/4 4/5 4/5 4 4/5 4 4 4 4 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 3/4 5 4/5 3/4 3/4 4 4 3/4 5/6 3% 45% 85% 114
Sarah Robson 05-05-09 85 72 5/6 5/6 4 5/6 5 4/5 5 4 4/5 3/4 4 5/6 4 5 5 4 6 5/6 4 4 4/5 5 4 6 1% 21% 65% 71
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-09 82 75 5/6 5/6 4 5 5 4/5 5 4 4/5 3/4 4 5/6 4 5 5 4 6 5 4 3/4 4/5 4/5 4 6 1% 27% 71% 84
Nina Sharma 05-05-09 139 132 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 100%100%100% 332
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-09 102 97 3/4 3 3 3 3 3 3/4 3 2/3 2/3 3 3 3 3 3 2/3 3/4 3 2/3 2/3 3 3/4 2/3 3/4 19% 87% 98% 180
James Thomas 05-05-09 111 113 2 1/2 2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2 2 1/2 2 2 2 2 2 1/2 2 2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2/3 1/2 2 81% 99% 100% 249
Margaret Thompson 05-05-09 107 112 2 1/2 2 1/2 2 2 2 2 1/2 2/3 2/3 2 2/3 2 1/2 2 2 1/2 1/2 2 2 2/3 1/2 2 77% 99% 100% 245
Peter Tucker 05-05-09 77 77 5/6 5 4 5 4/5 4/5 5 4 4 4 4/5 5 4/5 5 5 4 5/6 5 3/4 3/4 4/5 4/5 3/4 6 2% 31% 76% 92
David Vincents 05-05-09 119 111 2 2 2 1/2 2 2 2 2 1/2 1/2 1/2 2 1/2 2 1/2 2 2 1/2 1/2 2 2 2/3 1/2 2/3 74% 99% 100% 241

# Mean SAS calculations are based on one or two batteries only. If Verbal SAS is missing, indicators for languages are based on the Mean SAS and not the Verbal SAS.
© GL Assessment 2009

11
CAT Pupils' Intermediate Grade indicators listed by Surname Section D

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32
Intermediate 1 examinations Intermediate 2 examinations

Verbal Mean
Pupil Name Date of Test SAS SAS
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-09 88 93 4/5 4/5 3/4 6 4/5 6/7 6 5/6 5/6 5/6 7 8 12% 78% 96% 162
Jackie Blair 05-05-09 75 64 7/8 8 7 6/7 7/8 8/9 8/9 9 6/7 8 9 9 0% 12% 48% 36
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-09 123 131 1/2 1/2 1/2 2/3 1/2 2 2 1/2 3 2/3 1/2 2 100% 100% 100% 328
William Browne 05-05-09 94 93 4/5 4/5 3/4 5/6 4/5 6/7 6 5/6 5 5/6 7 8 12% 78% 96% 162
Dave Browne 05-05-09 104 100 4 4 3 5 4 5/6 5 4 4/5 5 6 7 28% 91% 99% 193
Michael Chung 05-05-09 72 72 6/7 7/8 6 6/7 6/7 8 8 8/9 6/7 7 8/9 9 1% 21% 65% 71
Alastair Clifton 05-05-09 92 93 4/5 4/5 3/4 6 4/5 6/7 6 5/6 5/6 5/6 7 8 12% 78% 96% 162
Gordon Dawes 05-05-09 92 93 4/5 4/5 3/4 6 4/5 6/7 6 5/6 5/6 5/6 7 8 12% 78% 96% 162
Natasha Gill 05-05-09 107 119 2 2/3 1/2 4/5 2 3/4 3 2 4 3 3 3/4 93% 100% 100% 275
Ruth Grant 05-05-09 92 98 4 4 3 6 4 6 5/6 4/5 5/6 5 6 7 22% 89% 98% 184
Jimmy Hills 05-05-09 82 67 7 8 6/7 6/7 7 8/9 8/9 8/9 6 7/8 9 9 1% 15% 54% 49
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-09 94 96 4 4/5 3 5/6 4 6 5/6 5 5 5 6/7 7/8 17% 85% 97% 175
Gary Jameson 05-05-09 139 128 1/2 2 1/2 1 1/2 2/3 2 1/2 2 2/3 2 2/3 99% 100% 100% 315
Roger Jones 05-05-09 86 84 5/6 6 4/5 6/7 5/6 7/8 7 7 6 6 8 8/9 4% 51% 88% 123
John Kennedy 05-05-09 84 67 7 8 6/7 6/7 7 8/9 8/9 8/9 6 7/8 9 9 1% 15% 54% 49
Tony Mathwes 05-05-09 127 123 2 2 1/2 2 2 3 2/3 1/2 2/3 3 2/3 3 97% 100% 100% 293
Neil Moss 05-05-09 107 107 3 3 2/3 4/5 3 4/5 4 3 4 4 4/5 5/6 57% 97% 100% 223
Peter Murdi 05-05-09 94 98 4 4 3 5/6 4 6 5/6 4/5 5 5 6 7 22% 89% 98% 184
John Nash 05-05-09 111 120 2 2 1/2 4 2 3 2/3 2 4 3 2/3 3 95% 100% 100% 280
Diane Peron 05-05-09 141 129 1/2 2 1/2 1 1/2 2/3 2 1/2 2 2/3 2 2 99% 100% 100% 319
Ken Reagan 05-05-09 107 114 2/3 2/3 2 4/5 2/3 4 3/4 2/3 4 3/4 3/4 4 83% 99% 100% 254
Mary Roberts 05-05-09 80 82 5/6 6 5 6/7 5/6 7/8 7/8 7/8 6 6/7 8 8/9 3% 45% 85% 114
Sarah Robson 05-05-09 85 72 6/7 7/8 6 6/7 6/7 8 8 8/9 6 7 8/9 9 1% 21% 65% 71
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-09 82 75 6/7 7 5/6 6/7 6/7 8 8 8 6 7 8/9 9 1% 27% 71% 84
Nina Sharma 05-05-09 139 132 1/2 1/2 1 1 1/2 2 2 1/2 2 2/3 1/2 2 100% 100% 100% 332
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-09 102 97 4 4 3 5 4 6 5/6 4/5 4/5 5 6/7 7/8 19% 87% 98% 180
James Thomas 05-05-09 111 113 2/3 2/3 2 4 2/3 4 3/4 2/3 4 3/4 3/4 4/5 81% 99% 100% 249
Margaret Thompson 05-05-09 107 112 2/3 2/3 2 4/5 2/3 4 3/4 2/3 4 3/4 3/4 4/5 77% 99% 100% 245
Peter Tucker 05-05-09 77 77 6 7 5/6 6/7 6 8 8 8 6/7 7 8/9 9 2% 31% 76% 92

# Mean SAS calculations are based on one or two batteries only. If Verbal SAS is missing, indicators for languages are based on the Mean SAS and not the Verbal SAS.
© GL Assessment 2009

12
CAT Individual pupils' Standard Grade Profiles Section C

School: Sample School Pupil Name: Shirley Aransiola CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Age: 10:02 Date of Test: 05-05-2009
Sex: Female
Mean CAT SAS: 93 Verbal SAS: 88 Quantitative SAS: 88 Non-Verbal SAS: 103

© GL Assessment 2009

13
CAT Individual pupils' Intermediate Grade profiles Section E

School: Sample School Pupil Name: Shirley Aransiola CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Age: 10:02 Date of Test: 05-05-2009
Sex: Female
Mean CAT SAS: 93 Verbal SAS: 88 Quantitative SAS: 88 Non-Verbal SAS: 103

Intermediate 1 examinations

Intermediate 2 examinations

© GL Assessment 2009

14

Cognitive
Abilities Test
Further Information about CAT scores is provided in the Cognitive
Abilities Test Administration Manual.
In case of enquiries please contact the GL Assessment Customer
Service Advisers on 0845 6021937.
Copyright © 2009 GL Assessment Limited.
GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.
Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses Profile
School: Sample School
Group: Sample Group
No. of pupils: 32
Section A - Relative Strengths and Weaknesses Profile
The following pages give lists of your combined
groups' or classes' results in the three batteries of
CAT tests, together with an indication of their relative
strengths and weaknesses. Performances are
expressed as being in one of four categories:
E: An even profile of performance across the three
batteries. No SAS differs from any other by ten or
more points.
D: One of the batteries' scores is "Distinct". It is ten
or more SAS points different from the other two
batteries' scores, though those two scores are within
ten points of each other. If the odd-one-out is greater
than the other two, then it may be said that this battery
represents a relative strength; if it is smaller then it
may be said to represent a relative weakness. The
sub-profile will show this.
C: The profile of performance shows a "Contrast"
among the scores. The largest SAS is ten or more
points greater than the lowest. The battery with the
greatest score can thus be reckoned a relative
strength, that with the lowest a relative weakness.
These are shown in the sub-profiles.
CC: A "Complete Contrast" among the three SAS
scores: they are all ten or more points apart from each
other. Again, the battery with the greatest score can
be reckoned a relative strength, that with the lowest a
relative weakness. These are shown in the
sub-profiles.
15
Section: A, B
CAT level: C
For the sub-profiles, the three batteries are
represented as V for verbal reasoning, Q for
quantitative reasoning and N for non-verbal
reasoning. A relative strength in one battery is
denoted by that battery's letter with a "+" suffix, a
relative weakness with a "-" suffix. So, for example, a
category D profile where the SAS for the verbal
battery is much bigger than the other two scores will
be shown as V+ in the "strengths/weaknesses"
column. Or a C profile where the biggest SAS is for
the verbal battery and the lowest is for the non-verbal
battery will be shown as V+N- in the
strengths/weaknesses column.
Clearly, no such elaboration needs to be or can be
made for category E profiles.
Section B - Visual-Verbal Profile Chart
The final page is a summary plot of the whole group's
verbal and non-verbal reasoning scores. It allows you
to see, at a glance, if there is a dominant
characteristic in the group for particular strengths and
weaknesses. A more detailed explanation is given on
that page.
CAT Group Summary of Strength/Weakness Profiles listed by Surname Section A

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32

Verbal Quantitative Non-Verbal Mean Strength/Weakness

Pupil Name Date of Test Age Sex RS SAS RS SAS RS SAS SAS Profile Subprofile
Shirley Aransiola 05-05-2009 10:02 Female 32 88 24 88 45 103 93 D N+
Jackie Blair 05-05-2009 10:01 Female 15 75 2 59 5 59 64 D V+
Kevin Blakeland 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 71 123 57 130 65 141 131 D N+
William Browne 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 41 94 24 88 36 96 93 E
Dave Browne 05-05-2009 10:02 Male 54 104 37 99 38 97 100 E
Michael Chung 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 13 72 13 77 9 68 72 E
Alastair Clifton 05-05-2009 10:03 Male 40 92 39 100 26 87 93 C Q+ N-
Gordon Dawes 05-05-2009 10:03 Male 39 92 28 90 39 97 93 E
Natasha Gill 05-05-2009 10:02 Female 58 107 48 110 64 140 119 D N+
Ruth Grant 05-05-2009 10:03 Female 39 92 36 97 46 104 98 C N+ V-
Jimmy Hills 05-05-2009 10:00 Male 23 82 5 60 0 59 67 D V+
Jeffrey Hilton 05-05-2009 10:03 Male 43 94 38 99 36 95 96 E
Gary Jameson 05-05-2009 10:00 Male 76 139 54 120 60 126 128 D V+
Roger Jones 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 29 86 22 86 17 80 84 E
John Kennedy 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 26 84 0 59 1 59 67 D V+
Tony Mathwes 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 73 127 53 117 60 126 123 C V+ Q-
Neil Moss 05-05-2009 10:03 Male 60 107 47 108 49 107 107 E
Peter Murdi 05-05-2009 10:00 Male 41 94 39 101 39 98 98 E
John Nash 05-05-2009 10:02 Male 62 111 55 122 61 128 120 D V-
Diane Peron 05-05-2009 10:03 Female 77 141 55 121 60 125 129 D V+
Ken Reagan 05-05-2009 10:02 Male 58 107 55 122 53 113 114 C Q+ V-
Mary Roberts 05-05-2009 10:01 Female 20 80 16 81 23 85 82 E
Sarah Robson 05-05-2009 10:02 Female 28 85 3 59 12 73 72 CC V+ Q-
Sandeep Roopra 05-05-2009 10:00 Female 23 82 6 63 18 81 75 D Q-
Nina Sharma 05-05-2009 10:02 Female 76 139 52 116 64 140 132 D Q-
Satpal Sidhu 05-05-2009 10:02 Male 52 102 23 87 44 102 97 D Q-
James Thomas 05-05-2009 10:01 Male 62 111 54 120 48 107 113 C Q+ N-
Margaret Thompson 05-05-2009 10:03 Female 59 107 49 110 57 119 112 C N+ V-
Peter Tucker 05-05-2009 10:02 Male 17 77 21 85 10 70 77 C Q+ N-
David Vincents 05-05-2009 10:00 Male 69 119 45 107 48 107 111 D V+
Tessa Watt 05-05-2009 10:02 Female 55 105 46 108 60 126 113 D N+
Mary Whittaker 05-05-2009 10:03 Female 71 121 50 112 63 134 122 D N+
* Note - Pupils need to complete all three batteries to obtain a profile category.

© GL Assessment 2009

16
CAT Visual-Verbal Profile Chart Section B

School: Sample School CAT Level: C

Group: Sample Group Number of Pupils: 32
The chart shows the verbal and non-verbal scores plotted
against each other for each student in the class or group.
This gives an at-a-glance picture of the characteristics of the
group, according to where they congregate on the plot. This
has been divided into five areas: four quadrants: A, B, C and
D and a central circle E. Pupils in each of these areas my be
characterised briefly as follows:
E: average pupils in terms of both verbal and visual
abilities.
A: pupils who are good with spoken and written words, but
who may be weaker with materials such as charts, figures
and diagrams.
B: balanced and strong in ability all round.
C: pupils who struggle with both texts and abstract
concepts.
D: pupils who are good at visualisation but may lack facility
in dealing with verbal and written material.

Note that these are mere thumbnail sketches of broad

learning types and should not be taken as classifying
individual pupils. The intention is to form an impression of the
abilities of a whole group, to assist in planning programmes
of teaching and learning for the group. Useful conclusions
can be reached about how best to approach classes of pupils
that fall largely into each of these areas. For a full discussion
of implications for teaching and learning , see "Getting the
Best from CAT" by Dr Steve Strand, published by GL
Assessment.

Gender key:
Boys
Girls
Unknown

© GL Assessment 2009

17
 CAT3 Digital Group Visual-Verbal Learning Profile - Thumbnail sketches
High
A B
Active talkers enjoy written work, group discussion,
essays, word games. Likely to be good in English,
MFL, history and all areas where verbal skills are
prominent.
Good with spoken and written words, but weaker
with materials such as charts, figures, diagrams etc.
Need support with visual modelling, e.g., science,
technology or geography where they are often
required to model ideas pictorially, and
other visual work such as
interpreting diagrams.
VERBAL
Struggle with both text and abstract
concepts. General issues of motivation
and self-esteem are present. Best to tap into
their interests and build upon their successes.
Target basic literacy and numeracy skills, use the
National frameworks for English and Maths, ICT
spreadsheets, clicker, games etc.
Provide structured tasks with clear directions, guidance,
support and break learning into small steps.
Will not learn by osmotic approaches, need active
methods with clear purposes (e.g. writing a letter
C of complaint)
Low
NON VERBAL
18
Well balanced and strong in their abilities, good with
both text and pictures/diagrams. Will perform well in
most areas of learning.
Will be good at forming hypotheses, asking questions,
predicting, applying examples to new situations
– encourage exploration of their own ideas as
independent learners.
Develop their study skills and ability to organise
their own learning, e.g. use of library,
Internet etc.
Good at visualisation and
inventing solutions, but may lack facility
in dealing with verbal and written work.
Could become frustrated and develop
behavioural problems. Presenting visual/spatial tasks
and study methods may lead to an improvement in
behaviour, attitude and progress in school.
More likely than other students to prefer active learning
methods, modelling, demonstrations, films, videos,
games, simulations etc.
D
High
case study
CAT Digital gets the green light at Weald of
Kent Grammar
“We want to inspire our students to aim high and
making sure we have a clear understanding of each
child’s learning potential is central to achieving this.We
use GL Assessment’s Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT)
Digital to assess our students’ capabilities before they
arrive at the school and this makes it easier for us to
ensure they are ready to learn right from the start of a
new academic year,” says Des Deehan, Deputy Head
Teacher at Weald of Kent Grammar.
Weald of Kent is a highly-regarded grammar school situated
in the heart of Tonbridge in Kent. Graded as Outstanding by
Ofsted in April 2007, the school prides itself on being able to
meet the individual educational needs of its students to
boost attainment. The leadership team uses CAT Digital to
assess the learning abilities of new students in the July prior
to their transfer from primary school. The test results provide
an important basis for making decisions on how each child’s
learning progress can be best supported. This has proved to
be a successful strategy for encouraging greater
achievement at Weald of Kent and in 2007, the school was
rewarded with an impressive 98% of students gaining five
A* to C-grade GCSE passes, including English and maths.
“Students’ CAT scores are an essential part
of getting the target-setting process right
as they provide us with a wealth of
information on each child’s individual
strengths and weaknesses.”
Attended by 1050 eleven to 18-year-olds, the majority of
Weald of Kent’s students are girls, although boys can enter
the school in the 6th form. The paper-based version of the
CAT test has been used for the past nine years to assess
students’ abilities upon their arrival at the school. The
assessment measures the three principal areas of reasoning
- verbal, non-verbal and numerical, as well as an element of
spatial ability. With a typical intake of over 150 children
joining Weald of Kent in Year 7, the decision to move to the
digital CAT test has proved a much more efficient way for
the school to carry out the valuable process of pupil testing.
“Using the online version of the CAT test ensures we can
complete our pupil assessments promptly and the digital
format makes this a less stressful experience for the
students. We have found that testing online helps students
settle in to the school easily because the results come
through quickly. This allows us to place children in their
learning groups from the first day they arrive and they can
then start making friends within their groups.”
Teachers refer to their students’ CAT scores throughout the
academic year as they provide a detailed picture of what
each child is capable of and this information can be very
powerful in driving progress. Results enable teachers to set
effective learning targets for individual students or groups
that are relevant to their potential. As a school with a
language specialism, for example, Weald of Kent regularly
identifies those students who have achieved a high score in
the verbal reasoning section of the test. These children are
then encouraged to study one of the many language
courses the school offers within the curriculum, such as
Italian, Portuguese or Japanese.
Students’ CAT data also plays a key role in helping teachers
predict how well their students will do in their GCSE exams.
Examining results in this way helps to ensure teachers can
provide learning support to those children who might be
falling below their expected level of achievement.
Analysing grades can uncover discrepancies between
students’ skills in areas such as verbal or non-verbal literacy,
which might suggest issues with delayed language
development. This knowledge can then be taken into
account when teachers are planning lessons.
“We have introduced an effective method of presenting
learning targets in a colour-coded system, which helps
19
students to take more responsibility for their own progress.
A target coloured green shows the child where they should
be at in their learning, based on their previous achievement,
and blue highlights what they could aspire to. Students’ CAT
scores are an essential part of getting the target-setting
process right as they provide us with a wealth of information
on each child’s individual strengths and weaknesses.”
The school leadership team has been pleased with how well
the introduction of digital testing at Weald of Kent has been
received by parents. It is usual practice for test results and
individual learning targets to be shared with parents as this
helps make it easier for them to see where they can provide
support at home.
“Digital testing has changed the way we
support teaching and learning and enabled
us to respond more quickly to the individual
needs of our students.”
Looking back at students’ results over a three or four year
time period ensures teachers at the school can track their
students’ progress as they learn. This helps them identify
those students who are regarded as high achievers so that
they can be provided with teaching and learning that will
engage and challenge them to achieve more.
“We are extremely proud of our school and its students and
we are delighted that Ofsted has confirmed our status as an
outstanding school. We offer a vibrant learning community
where individuality is celebrated and independence is
nurtured. Digital testing has changed the way we support
teaching and learning and enabled us to respond more
quickly to the individual needs of our students.”
March 2009
 Contact your local consultant for further information

GL Assessment, Chiswick Centre, 414 Chiswick High Road, London, W4 5TF

Phone: 0845 602 1937 Fax: +44 (0) 20 8742 8767 www.gl-assessment.co.uk
GLA156