This is the recent KS2 English reading test that staff and pupils thought was hard

[cakeorwine]

Key stage 2 tests: 2023 English reading test materials - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Only had a quick look - but I thought people might find it interesting

@Damnspot - my DD is not that unusual in her class. We are in a 11 plus area. 45% of the class typically gets greater depth at SATS too.

But only a small percentage of children do 11+

This is supposed to be something the majority of children can pass so it can measure if the school has met a basic standard of english and maths.

@JustanothermagicMonday1 my daughter was similar in her interests and was unusual in her school. In her case it all added to her autism diagnosis!

You must be aware that your school isn't typical and 45% greater depth also isn't typical.

I dont get why these type of threads draw out those who want to say "oh my child could do that" when they have a particularly bright child. Are they not aware of the fact SATS is for all children and the effect it can have on making kids feel stupid at 11 and then the knock on effect. These aren't optional 11+ exams, they're exams all 11 year olds take.

There are several things that made this a difficult paper:

• the length of the extracts meant that children had, on average, 25 seconds per mark to earn them. This included reading the questions and going back to the paper for the answer.

• the questions were deliberately phrased differently to the text in the book, rendering skimming skills near useless. It also meant children had to decipher the text, decipher the questions and then identify the link.

• in previous papers, there have been more justifiable answers, meaning that children had a range of options in how to answer given questions provided they could justify answers with evidence from the text. This paper's questions were far more restrictive so if you didn't infer the very specific thing they expected you to, you wouldn't get the mark.

• the texts were incredibly dull.

As an adult sat reading the paper at your leisure, of course it's easy to spot answers and infer information. But as a 10-11 year old child during the exam, it isn't.

Previous papers had rigor but were fair and balanced. This one wasn't.

The issue seems to have been the length, I think someone calculated that it only left them 20 minutes to answer the questions after reading the text and the questions based on the government reading speeds. Of course mumsnet is full of parents whose kids could have done it easily, but this isn’t representative.

The first story is a bit boring.

Wow. I can think of one child reading an (adult? Broadsheet?) Newspaper in year 4.

None of mine could or would have wanted to (all ended up with good A levels and at RG unis BTW for anyone anxious that their kids should be that advanced at 8)

I can't believe how many people are completely invalidating the feelings of so many kids. The reality is there were huge numbers of kids who were really distressed by this test (far more than usual) which shows it wasn't well thought out. It was the length of the paper that was the issue. If it was your child in floods of tears at 10/11 years old because of an exam maybe your replies are different. So many of you seem to think it's an ok test because your able child would find it ok but a large percentage of kids didn't find it ok. That's the reality.

Ok. So it's all fine if grammar school ability children can do the whole paper with one hand tied behind their back

What about the 3rd quartile kids? A SATs paper should be accessible to them.
And the bottom quartile? Or do we just not care about them?

Well I was going to say that the only child I came across who was reading at that level was autistic!

Looking at it, it shouldn't have been too hard. The fact it was, indicates to me a greater problem. Maybe it is the NC is too busy at primary level, I'm sure it is a mixture of things. There is a problem, but it was not the paper.

“But only a small percentage of children do 11+

This is supposed to be something the majority of children can pass so it can measure if the school has met a basic standard of english and maths.”

The real issue is that the majority of children do not read a wide range of texts regularly anymore because they do other stuff on screens.
Most top jobs require a high level these days - the world is a competitive place and more and more talent is coming from eg. Asia and parents from that background typically make sure their kids read and do lots of maths.

I don’t think our government should not push the more able children. The SATS papers need to have higher level questions in it too for them. As well as basic questions. All children need to learn to not have to finish and to accept mistakes.
Maybe the answer is to have two papers - a basic one and a higher level second one for the more able? However, then children get artificially pigeonholed into only doing the former? Which is not great either.

There is plenty of time for the higher achievers to shine and gain certificates at 16 and 18. There's no need for that at 11. We dont show our sats certificates to anyone and lots of people change.

Yes during the year at school high achievers should be challeneged etc but the SATS paper should be accessible to all. Its fine if high achievers find it easy.

It's actually fucking sad that some parents think aceing that awful, dull test means their kids are going to get jobs over kids that didn't do so well. Give it a rest.

Yes, let the 11 year old geniuses breeze through. They don't need to be 'challenged' all the time, they've got pushy parents to do that for them.

That would be if they were reading the extracts word for word rather than a) skimming for general meaning (texts of that length should be skimmed in about 30 seconds- 60 max- they're only looking for general gist) then b) over to the questions one by one, and back to the text to scan to find the answer.

Reading word for word then attacking the questions would take much longer.

That's how reading comp techniques are taught in secondary. I'd presume the same in primary.

It's hard to skim as other pps have said. Qs worded very differently to text

The first text was very Enid Blyton!

You don't skim to look for the answers. You skim for general gist and research shows a lot more understanding in terms of inference, meanings and opinions go in than you think. You scan for the answers after skimming. You don't need to read the whole text at any point for this type of exercise.

Yes! I thought that. Missing the lashings of ginger beer only.

What you call “pushy” parents tend to be people who work in professional jobs and understand the competition out there which is now global.

They are not taught to skim read at primary I don't think. They are taught to read carefully.

😂😂🙄

The point is that the texts are too long. It would take almost half the test time just to read the text. That is way beyond standard tests for this age. Each question might seem reasonable but that us complete missing the point. The FACT is that an analysis of the paper puts it with the 2016 paper which was also an outlier in terms of complexity/length etc.
and the issue is that stressing a dc at a young age by setting them something beyond the norm can set them up for a lifetime of exam anxiety which impacts future tests. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that setting a test too arduous has the potential for negative impacts.

I talked to my lad about it. He said it was a bit weird but not hard. He didn't understand the outcry as it seemed pretty much in line with the practice they'd done.