To be THAT parent? Yet another bloody test!

[Tessalectus]

My DC has completed their KS2 SATs last week, with all the pressure that had been put on them all year - constant mentions, booster classes, extra morning sessions etc.

I am a teacher, so understand the pressure the school is under to get decent results, even though we have refused to let DC attend any extra lessons, which they don't need as they are pretty much top of their class anyway.

But two days ago I found out that, this week, the children were subjected to YET ANOTHER bloody test, which forms part of the internal assessment. I am extremely pissed off.

What is the point? The tests now have no relevance - they are pointless from a school POV (even Ofsted don't care about internal assessments anymore) and even more pointless, given that any decent secondary school will even take the (halfway) controlled SATs with a pinch of salt.

WIBU to write a - reasonably polite - email to their teacher requesting the point of these? And when said teacher responded and tried to butter me up by telling me how well DC has approached their SATs and then telling me the test had been scheduled as part of the internal assessment, responding by telling them all of this is irrelevant?

AIBU to take this up with the head? My workplace is too far away to have a face-to-face meeting and I work all school days.
AIBU to have told my child to actively boycott any more internal tests?

I am normally a very supportive parent as I know the pressure from a teacher's perspective, but I will back my child up to the hilt over this.

No one?

Can you take them out of all tests from now on? You know they are pointless so why should your child be sitting them?

Surely as a teacher yourself you know how important internal bench marking is? It's fine having some teacher assessment but sometimes tests are necessary

By all means email the head and express your dissatisfaction and see what they say but you are being massively unreasonable to have told your child to "actively boycott any more internal tests". In that respect, yes you are being "that" parent.

It probably wasn't the teacher's choice to set the assessment, it was most likely a school decision that she carried out. I know there is a lot of pressure on kids, and another test does seem unfair but presumably the school thought it was necessary as most teachers wouldn't want to add more stress to their students. Teaching your child they can just boycott them is quite simply wrong. What happens if all the children just go around deciding to boycott things their parents don't think is fair and say they can... If you are a teacher you should understand what chaos that would cause!

The way to remove exam nerves and desenitise, is to do exams.

One of my DSs who was a bundle of nerves at 8 was as cool as a cucumber by 10 and by 18 nothing phased him.

Like everything, it's about practice. Think long term..

I’m a teacher and would do the same. We have to, as parents, start drawing a line. For all you know this is coming from the head (or even a SIP or similar), you might be doing the teacher a favour!

Regardless, no child should be put through this nonsense.

Surely as a teacher yourself you know how important internal bench marking is? It's fine having some teacher assessment but sometimes tests are necessary

Benchmarking makes sense to target extra support for the upcoming external exams and to see progress made as a result.
It makes no sense to test after that point, same as if I told my GCSE students I will set them another test after they have just sat their final exams - they'd be quite right to give me the finger as a response.

I do not for one moment blame classroom teachers (even if this one is a senior leader...). If this is scheduled/ policy/ whatever then it needs changing.

YABU

Take it up with the Head. Don’t tell your child to refuse, as when your child is punished that will be on you.

The PP saying can I take my child out, if I had known in advance they wouldn't have gone in that day.

I'm interested to know what other PP think these tests are for.

Teaching your child they can just boycott them is quite simply wrong. What happens if all the children just go around deciding to boycott things their parents don't think is fair and say they can... If you are a teacher you should understand what chaos that would cause!

Some school rules are reasonable, others are not. I would 100% back the school in most circumstances and have done so many times in the past.

But as Ivestoppedreadingthenews said, we have to draw the line when things are not. There is a regular, polarised debate on here about toilet breaks and children not being allowed to go.
There is a regular debate about the length of breaks, which are getting shorter all the time. There was the school in Birmingham, which enforces complete silence in the corridors at changeover. Or the primary school where children were forced to walk with hands behind their backs. Any of those reasonable?

Would any parent be unreasonable to encourage boycott of any of the above? Maybe the toilet one, but even there is a limit.

And there has been plenty of "desensitising" in the run-up to these SATs (which in themselves are untrustworthy, but that is a whole other story) to the exclusion of almost everything else.

Was it for either science or writing? Teachers have to submit teacher assessment judgements for both (I think - poss science has been dropped?) so testing either of these isn’t unreasonable. Though a writing test seems unlikely. Another maths, SPAG or reading seems unnecessary, though not quite the big deal you’re making of it OP.

they'd be quite right to give me the finger as a response.

Really? On what level would that ever be "quite right?"

Science was dropped a few years ago. It was another reading test.

.Really? On what level would that ever be "quite right?" Metaphorically of course , though not unusual for teenagers in the schools I work(ed) in even when reasonable requests are made. Again, another story.

There was the school in Birmingham, which enforces complete silence in the corridors at changeover. Or the primary school where children were forced to walk with hands behind their backs. Any of those reasonable?

What’s wrong with silence?

What’s wrong with silence?

Are you expected to be silent during your break times? Or when you walk from one place to another?

Tessalectus

No. But that doesn’t answer my question.

I’m in Aus. Our kids seem to have pre and post tests in most subjects most terms. Not sure if this is equivalent to what your kids has but if so it seems reasonable to me. Know where kids are at the start, know where they are after teaching and therefore what effect the teaching had.

Okay, I'll bite.

Silence is reasonable and necessary at certain points during a lesson. Children need to be able to concentrate and listen to instructions.

Silence is unreasonable at "down" times. Students need to learn social norms and to interact with groups of people. Part of the decline of discipline in schools is down to the fact that children are not allowed to interact much anymore and are equally not left to sort conflicts out themselves.

Students are also entitled to regular breaks. We are talking about 11-12-year-olds not being allowed to speak to their peers socially for about 7 hours a day, not including a (say) 20min morning break and a 30min lunchtime, which are now the norm.

I became a teacher because I cared about the future of children and young adults. Education has long since left that path.

YANBU. It is reassuring to hear you be so sensible as a teacher.

Broadly speaking, rules are great. Some rules / instructions need to be challenged though and I feel it is part of the job as a parent (or a teacher - I am not a schoolteacher) to help children understand this.

Testing after SATs has finished is just cruel and would never happen (I hope) at my DC’s very sensible school.

Silence can be used as oppression and as a form of social control in schools.

Tessalectus

Depending on what is actually happening between lessons, silence might be a reasonable measure to encourage good discipline. It’s a couple of minutes walking from one lesson to another, not “downtime”. They don’t have to be silent during breaks and lunch, do they?

I can think of several benefits to silence. A calmer, more peaceful day for students who find school overwhelming? Fewer negative interactions between students? A chance to think and reflect? Sounds quite nice.

Doesn’t the school in B’ham that has silent corridors have a timetable where lesson changeovers happen while other pupils are still in lessons? Isn’t it to prevent disruption to the pupils trying to learn?

Sounds quite nice. If you like silence yes. Personally I hate it.

TooStressyTooMessy

I really like it. Lots of kids do.

Our kids seem to have pre and post tests in most subjects most terms. Not sure if this is equivalent to what your kids has but if so it seems reasonable to me. Know where kids are at the start, know where they are after teaching and therefore what effect the teaching had.

You're describing a system of DDT, which is quite good at showing progress.

SATs are national tests done at the end of year 2 and the end of year 6. They test progress made throughout primary school and children are now nationally tested on entry in reception (at the age of 4), then again in year 1 (reading) and in the above SATs, in addition to every internal test.

SATs are meant to show a child's abilities in English and Maths upon leaving primary school and are used as a rough benchmark to set targets for the students' GCSEs at age 16.

Any tests in primary school after KS2 SATs are meaningless, especially a week after their abilities in said English skills have already been tested to death. They are not useful to schools (which are assessed on their KS1 and 2 SATs results) and they are not useful for secondary schools, which will use the KS2 SATs as a benchmark and then ideally do their own CAT scores to get a more accurate picture.