To think that SATS are more important than people let on?

[Inthehottub]

On mumsnet I always find that the general consensus is that SATS aren’t important.

Once upon a time I would have agreed.

However, now I’ve experienced having a child go through secondary school and GCSEs, I would say that SATS results are very important.

Our experience was that the SATS results determine which sets the child goes into in secondary school and also the GCSE predicted grades. I know that there are other assessments too, but SATS are a large part of it.

Our experience of secondary school was also that the ‘top set’ kids get absolutely everything thrown at getting them those top grades. I was also told by teachers and pupils alike that the lower sets tend to have more disruptive children so it’s harder for the quieter less able kids to work their way up out of the bottom sets.

Obviously that’s only my experience having had two go through secondary school and one now approaching sats.

Interested to know what others think.

Yabu - SATS are not important
Yanbu - they are very important

Thank you.

That is very helpful. I've not heard about Attainment 8 or Progress 8 (and I have a child in secondary school !!)

Progress 8 is based on progress from KS2 SATs to GCSEs I believe.

Didn’t or did? You say they didn’t then explain they did?

I'm a million years old and didn't even do SATs in yr 6, only in yr 9, so obviously, I appreciate that things change, however I didn't really flourish until year 8. I found the initial transition to senior school and yr 7 in general difficult.

I was streamed in the top sets for everything though, when the time came. Children flourish when the time is right, and for many that won't be Yr 6. It would be ridiculous to base a child's whole academic future on a test they did at 11!

Why are predicted grades relevant? Presumably the pupil can get better (or worse) than their predicted grade without issue?

They are a load of rubbish. We moved from abroad and my eldest went into year 8, no SATS, no predicted grades. She’s doing just fine. My boy went straight into year 6 and did SATS. I find them absolutely hilarious. He has predicted SATS grades for Spanish and German which he didn’t even learn in year 6 lol. Our school moved the kids into sets based on their ability shown in the classroom. Not an over engineered test in a very small number of subjects

They can but as has been explained in some detail on this thread, how much support they get and the sets they are in will have an impact on how much they improve.

@SALaw The secondary can put in early intervention for a child if they’re falling behind their predicted outcomes. It benefits the school to do well and not let a child coast or fall behind it benefits the child as it helps keep an eye on them. SATs are important.

Dd didn't do SATs due to losing her dad just before they started. If a child doesn't do SATs the government set a target of 4 for that child regardless of ability and the school are required to show progress against that as I understand it. (Even if the school tell you a different target based on performance in secondary school exams)

Although dd got higher gcse grades than 4 in line with her actual ability, I think the problem would have been if she'd not been progressing well. The school probably would have targeted extra help at kids who were falling behind their government set target, not her.

SATs for Spanish and German? As had been said further up thread if you go into high school with no SATs grades then there’s possibility she will have a conservative target grade for GCSE which may be higher or lower than her actual ability.

Ds 14 y9 is only streamed in Maths since y7. He will chose gcse shortly and then move to streams for some of these

Dd will be going to a different school and again they only stream maths

Maths apparently due to the way its taught which makes sense

The CGP SATS books now have stretch books... so our whats app is blowing up with who has what .... and reminds me why sets are not great.

Can't place importance on this imo

My 3rd child high iq, v intelligent is asd adhd and would do badly due to the structure and limitations of these and the studying but he performs off the scale in loads of other tests - top 1%.
But i think that's irrelevant as he wont be going to a mainstream school

They are a measure of primary school attainment and in some cases, how much the primary crams the kids for them. If the secondary school is using them to set flight path it's lazy.

I'm governor at a secondary comp and we do our own assessments in year 7, and almost all teaching is mixed ability right up through KS4. There's no evidence setting improves attainment at all, and setting is only ever a measure of past attainment anyway, not future ability.

So it's a really bad approach by the secondary school to put so much store on them, although they undoubtedly do.

I am interested that so many posters are shocked that our children are tested at 10 and it can dictate their schooling. We have the Kent Test here and only the grammar schools are above the national average, just. All other local schools are in the red. That is the reality of where I live and the pressures of kids at 10.

As others have said previously, there are two separate discussions here.

1. Are SATs used for setting? Depends on the school.

2. Are secondaries nationally compared and ranked by progress from SATs to GCSEs (Progress 8)? Yes (with a hiccup for Covid).

For some schools, the way they choose to try to maximise statistical progress from SATs across the cohort is through a very tight and explicitly shared tracking of individual students against the ‘expected’ grades that will give ‘expected’ progress, and reacting through setting, interventions, allocation of specific resources to pupils falling below this expected progress.

Others, while equally measured and judged by progress from SATs to GCSEs, may find they achieve this progress best in a slightly less ‘SATs-focused’ explicit way.

Overall, it is best for the child for SATs, if they take them, to accurately reflect their day to day work, so that expectations of them are realistic and allocation of additional resources / support as precise as possible.

I was talking about my son who did SATS. My point was it has made zero impact that my daughter didn’t do SATS. She has been put into the relevant sets based on her ability shown at secondary. She has no target grade in her report cards other than what she has achieved at secondary. My son has target grades based on his SATS which are completely irrelevant for where he is and which sets he has been placed in.

I’d question a school that isn’t able to identify support needs without looking to predicted grades or a test sat years previously.

Hmmm. For me, “what’s infront of me” would include a range of data like SATs, CATs, last years achievement. And yes, their FFT estimate.

That is not how TAGs or CAGs or live exams are marked though. Which is what I was talking about.

My year 13 essays need marking this weekend. I'll be using the mark scheme and nothing else - the feedback I give them will be based on the steps they need to take to move up the mark scheme, not on a target they were set based on ks2 tests that they may or may not have been "helped" with when they were 10.

Nobody cares because you can’t measure it. You can’t measure enjoyment, passion, happiness at school, confidence, friendships, mentorship, curiosity, kindness etc so Ofsted don’t care. Performance management targets, as well as school performance indicators, have to be measurable, so the immeasurable gets devalued.

Ok we’re talking at cross purposes, sorry. I thought we were talking about predicted grades.

The issue is that schools can identify support needs but have (increasingly severely) restricted capacity to meet them.

In the resulting ‘rationing’ scenario, scarce resources will be allocated to where they can make most difference to the school’s data - at the critical 3/4/5 boundaries for English & Maths, and also at pupils who are close to the boundary between negative / neutral / positive progress against their SATs-derived centrally-measured ‘expected’ levels.

The young people who took their GCSEs last summer, and the ones who will sit their GCSEs this summer did not do the year 6 SATs. I am hoping the secondary schools being forced to look at other ways to measure progress will have changed things for the better.

As far as I know, the intention of the Government (schools have no say or control) is to return to the former Progress 8 measure once the Covid-era blip has gone through. Exactly as they did after the year when SATs were disrupted by strikes.

No. I don't care much about predicted grades either though

Tell this to the government, not individual schools.