What is the correct answer to the question?

[FutureGadgetsLab]

A practise English paper for year 6 question. The question was to work out whether something was certain, possible or impossible. So "I may go to Ella's house" is possible, "I am going out" is definite and so on.

The question was "it may rain cats and dogs, if we have a storm"

What would your answer to this question be? I'm convinced the answer book is wrong.

Us.

Bloody phone.

Tail ASD doesn't get taken into account. You can get extra time, laptops and rest breaks, as well as a separate room, but they wouldn't make allowances for interpreting something literally.

Not necessarily, some spelling errors will be impossible for some dyslexics

I was simplifying the situation. Mostly due to my limited understanding of the condition but I'm sure you get the thrust of the point. If we assume (rightly or wrongly) that dyslexic people struggle to read but not comprehend, then it makes perfect sense to allow them longer in an exam as the extra time will enable them to get the best grade they possibly can.

nobility

Taking into account the fact that drought and rain are mutually exclusive ("a contradiction in terms") I don't know what point you're trying to make.

The three sentences you've used could be called grammatically similar but logically (and that's what this is, in essence) they are completely different.

drought NAND storm

storm && rain

etc

but they wouldn't make allowances for interpreting something literally

because this question isn't open to interpretation. It isn't one of those wishy-washy, namby-pamby subjects with interpretation.

It's like maths. I think that people are seeing the 'English' bit and confusing the subject. English language is a binary subject. You're correct or not.

Take a maths example:

If apples + bananas = 10 && bananas - apples = 4 → apples = 6.

If someone said 'bananas - apples = a poor fruit salad' then they'd be wrong despite it being their interpretation of the question.

The point I'm making is that the question of whether a sentence of this structure is "possible" or not can't come down to pure grammar.

Assuming that the purpose of the test is to assess knowledge of grammar then making the question cleared would not make the test less valuable - it would simply make it more accessible to people with a specific disability who struggle with ambiguity. Personally a huge part of the way I prepare for exams is by doing repeated past papers because it helps me to understand more clearly how the questions tend to be phrased and what us expected because I frequently look at the answers and think "that's not what they asked though" so I have to learn how to interpret them

Year 6 however is still pretty young and I don't think a small change to the phrasing of the question to make it clear what is being assesses would be unreasonable at that stage.

I'm shocked by how many posters object to that. To me it's basically a reasonable adjustment to make parts of the curriculum more accessible. It would be one thing if it was a test of comprehension but it's not, it's a test of grammar

it can if it's a grammar question, though, nobility. Not if it's a logic or critical thinking question, but on a grammar paper, that's what's being tested.

nobility

The point I'm making is that the question of whether a sentence of this structure is "possible" or not can't come down to pure grammar.

Ah.

Yes it can. Using the correct logical operators it absolutely does come down to pure grammar. You've just made me very sad as I realised just how long it is since I graduated but it comes down to propositional logic.

The fact that this is a common idiom is a red herring *Bertie, I can see what you mean.

Even with these contradictions in terms, the 'may' makes things possible:

'If the sun comes out, everything may go dark'.. ...perhaps a cloud will cover the sun all of a sudden

'If there is a drought, it may rain'... perhaps In the middle of a drought the rain may suddenly come. People would hope so.

nobilityobliges you said if there is a drought, it may rain" and "if there is a storm, it may rain" and "if there is a rainstorm, it may rain." The first is impossible
No the first is still possible nobility in my opinion.

But I am not so sure the exam was just about this point of pure grammar. I think it was also about understanding metaphors. even if you don'y know the idiom, as in a poem, you can get the gist of what a downpour feels like!

English is usually about both aspects.

Is there a Key Stage Year 6 Teacher around here who knows the exact abilities being assessed?

(Sigh) six pages of interesting and intelligent debate about a grammatical construct.

But my 10 year old will only get one measly mark IF she has the good fortune to guess which of the three (all perfectly justifiable) options is the "correct" one in the examiner's mind.

And THAT'S why people have been protesting so much about "new SATs" this year.

The cats and dogs aspect of the question is irrelevant. People who take the second meaning to its literal extreme may want to answer the question as 'extremely unlikely'. The literal thinkers would remember the last time they were caught in a heavy downpour and answer, 'yes it might, because it did on dd/mm/yyyy'. In modal logic / grammar / modal verbs (call it what you will), there is no difference between extremely unlikely, nearly impossible or might / may.

But if you're using modal logic then it makes no difference whether you're talking about raining cats and dogs or raining heavily. You should be concentrating on the word "may".

It did rain cats and dogs in medieval times, some people had cottages with lofts to store the hay etc and the animals would go up there to keep warm. If it flooded out the animals would fall to the floor.. Hence the expression. ( I am sure this is correct ) There was a history thing on facebook from one of my more bookish friends and a lot of old sayings were true, admittedly many years ago! So it is 'possible'. Silly question though. I would hate to be at school nowadays. You rarely hear people say it now. (Usually its f ing raining, round here)

*AChickenCalledKorma - (Sigh) six pages of interesting and intelligent debate about a grammatical construct.

But my 10 year old will only get one measly mark IF she has the good fortune to guess which of the three (all perfectly justifiable) options is the "correct" one in the examiner's mind.

And THAT'S why people have been protesting so much about "new SATs" this year*

No. You've missed the point. If she has to guess each question out of 3 then statistically she'll get 33% correct.

If she's taught to understand the difference between will, will not and may / might then she'll get them all correct.

Trying to turn this into a political discussion doesn't detract from this being about knowing a subject or not. It isn't about "correct" in the examiners mind. It's either correct or not. That's an indisputable fact. Your daughter may get it correct or she may not but it has nothing to do with the conservatives or what the marker decides is correct. See my maths example in a PP.

all perfectly justifiable

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no and NO!

Some replies on this thread epitomise the reason I could never be a teacher. There are so many ways you can say no before you start making stupid faces and slowly shaking your head.

Someone once said that teachers are people who's patience outlasts others misunderstanding. God bless teachers is all I can say.

Certain. It certainly may rain cats and dogs if there is a storm.

It's not just about teaching her the difference between will and may though, there's a second piece of learning about understanding what the wording of the question means. She could understand the grammar perfectly and still get the question wrong by not understanding that the object of the question is to assess the use of will/may but instead thinking the question is literal and asking if what is stated could happen.

Assuming that the purpose of the test is to assess knowledge of grammar then making the question cleared would not make the test less valuable - it would simply make it more accessible to people with a specific disability who struggle with ambiguity

I'm shocked by how many posters object to that. To me it's basically a reasonable adjustment to make parts of the curriculum more accessible. It would be one thing if it was a test of comprehension but it's not, it's a test of grammar

I completely agree.

Potatoes The question itself is open to interpretation. Not the answer as such. You're suggesting it should be "obvious" that it is only concentrating on grammar because it's English, but the problem is someone with ASD will struggle to "read between the lines". That doesn't mean they don't understand grammar and shouldn't come into the test.

Grammatically "it may" means possible.

Potatoes The question itself is open to interpretation

No it isn't

You're suggesting it should be "obvious" that it is only concentrating on grammar because it's English

Yes and the students should be taught so.

the problem is someone with ASD will struggle to "read between the lines"

There's no reading between the lines. It's looking at it from an Eng. Lang. point of view. If the student can't do that then it's a shame but they look for their forte as opposed to wanting the exam to be changed to best suit them.

That doesn't mean they don't understand grammar

Yes it does.

It isn't about making the curriculum more acccessible, it's about robust examination of a student's ability.

I think this is the point where we perfectly understand each other but will never agree so we clink glasses (coffee mugs / tea cups) and agree to disagree.

Thanks *The80s8
It did rain cats and dogs in medieval times, some people had cottages with lofts to store the hay etc and the animals would go up there to keep warm. If it flooded out the animals would fall to the floor.

That is very interesting.

Name

How? I fail to see how not understanding "possible" was referring to grammatically possible and not the factual definition means you don't understand grammar.

The question is expecting that

A) People are aware of that idiom

and

B) The person understands that possible in this context refers to grammar only

People with ASD struggle with ambiguity. That isn't the same as not understanding grammar. Why do you think reasonable adjustments should not be made?

I think that some people aren't understanding the difference between ASD and making a grammar mistake.

I have an absolutely excellent understanding of grammar. I spent 4 years understanding it at Cambridge.

not understanding "possible" was referring to grammatically possible and not the factual definition

This makes no sense. If we ignore factual definitions the doesn't 2+3=12?

//-----------

The question is expecting that

A) People are aware of that idiom

No

B) The person understands that possible in this context refers to grammar only

Yes. It's an English exam and the teacher should have made it clear.

People with ASD struggle with ambiguity. That isn't the same as not understanding grammar. Why do you think reasonable adjustments should not be made?

Because it's an exam or test. It tests understanding without making allowances by changing the questions.

I think that some people don't understand the difference between ASD and making a grammar mistake.

grammar mistake = wrong

ASD = something which may make spotting the mistakes more difficult

They're hardly comparable.

As someone who teaches English I can say that many hours are spent discussing whether questions are clearly worded and fair.

If it's stated somewhere that the question is about the use of grammar, then it's a fair question.

As use of idiom is taught as part of English, it could just as easily be asking whether this is literally true or not. In which case there is a different answer.

So - it really does come down to how clear the instructions were.

I don't see how anyone can say 'it's obvious' unless they saw the actual paper. And yes, questions should be VERY clear about whether they want an inferential reading etc.

Many people on the spectrum could easily misunderstand a question, but tell them that it's about idiom or metaphor and they can work it out. They just need clear instructions, not a blase assumption that it's 'obvious'.

(The first privilege of the privileged is not to see the privilege. Those people currently NT un-impaired should not take their advantage so much for granted.)

The problem is someone with ASD will struggle to "read between the lines". That doesn't mean they don't understand grammar and shouldn't come into the test.

I asked my DD10 who is on the CAMHS referral list for suspected ASD.

She looked at me suspiciously for a while (she knows I only ask leading questions) and then asked 'Does it have to happen naturally?' and I refused to comment. So she thought about it a bit more and said 'Possible. Because someone could get a big tall machine and fill it full of cats and dogs and tip them out and then it would be like it was raining cats and dogs'

I pointed out that 'raining cats and dogs' was a well known idiom and she said 'Oh yes, I know about that phrase because my friend uses it lots, but when you asked me that question I didn't think about it being a phrase, I was just picturing cats and dogs'. FWIW, she is in Year 5 and when last assessed at Christmas was at level 4A in literacy. It wasn't the grammar, the sense of it completely passed her by. She's not wired that way. As she occasionally says 'I JUST DON'T DO METAPHORS MUMMY!'

Future, it would be really handy if you could see the question verbatim.

I have read an awful lot of SATs questions of late because I've been tutoring my son who has autism and dyslexia.

What I suspect the question asks is, 'Do the following statements express certainty, possibility or impossibility'.

The children will have been taught to scan the questions for the expressions 'may, might could' (possibility) 'will, shall' (certainty) or 'won't, can't, wouldn't' (impossibility). They will be looking for those specific words, so, in the case of the above, it's possibility.

My son is sitting these next week. The dyslexia is severe (reads to about Y1 level and can only hold words in place for about 7 minutes before they just dance about), and he has autism, but he can answer this question. He might think, 'That's just stupid', but he'll know to listen for the 'may' and check the right box.

Don't get me wrong - SATs are vile and unnecessary things, but you have to see the grammar of the thing like maths. DS hated grammar until I turned it into maths and taught it as 'may = possibility' and 'Past tense + verb 'to have' = perfect tense' and 'If a sentence starts 'If I/he/it... and asks for the subjunctive mood, write the pigging word 'were' and then stick two fingers up at the fucking government...'

He can't read and struggles with society in general, but he can hit about 80% on the grammar test (he is a very clever boy). This is lucky, because he's pretty well out of the spelling part. He'll be left high and dry for the reading test where he won't get a reader, and he will be expected to pass the paper despite the fact that his brain can't see the words. If he doesn't, he'll have to repeat it next year when the same thing will happen unless they magically rustle up a cure for dyslexia in the next 12 months.