Taking child out during SATs week

[tickingstripe]

I have name changed because my description of the school might identify me.

I heard from a friend, a few months ago, that a child in my DS's class was being taken out of school during SATs week because his mum didn't agree with them. She has now done this and the boy has been off all week.

The year group sizes are a maximum of 15 each year so his absence will have a big impact on the school's league table position. At the moment it is at the top of the league tables with a 100% pass rate. But if it was just the league table position, I wouldn't be bothered about what she has done. What bothers me is:

I think she has done it just to make a point, and so it is for her benefit not her son's. Unlike a lot of schools, the school only does 2 weeks of SATs revision, so they have not made it stressful for the children. He sat the mocks last week, so I don't see how the real thing is any worse. He is now going to have the stress of coming back to school and the other kids thinking he has done something out of order (which they do think). The rest of the class has worked really hard and it seems unfair that 1 just didn't turn up.

The other children have bonded through doing the SATs and looking forward to the treats that follow. The school is taking them out on fun and exciting trips on 3 days in a row, and then taking them out for a meal on the 4th day, all as a reward for doing the SATs. Apparently the Head is to decide whether or not the child who didn't attend can go on all of the trips.

I feel she has undermined the school and the teacher, particularly as her son came from a Steiner school at age 8, and the school then had to teach him to read, write and do maths, and a lot of extra effort went into this.

So AIBU to care? It just seems unfair and disruptive to the other children, who had to sit the SATs and try their best, knowing someone else was treating it as optional.

Agree with slowreadingprogress - I would never judge a school by its SATs results, and I would never push my own child into something I felt was not right for them just for the sake of the school's place in the league tables.

We know nothing of why the child is no longer at the Steiner school - it may not be because she wanted more formal education, she may simply have been unable to afford it any more. The fact is that unless you can pay for private education, or home educate, you can't choose a 'school that doesn't do this type of testing' as all state school do SATs.

My old school was terrible, bullying rife, lots of supply teachers who couldn't hold class attention, none of us did very well.

I often thought then, why don't inspectors come round and see for themselves how bad this is for the children?

My parents didn't care about how well the school performed.

I did care because I feel I could have done better if I was at a school that cared about standards.

I recently checked up on my old school, with OFSTED and SATS etc, there is a HUGE difference: better teaching leads to better results which means children can have a brighter future with good qualifications.

My dc are at a small primary where they care about each child, SATs are important because even children with SN do well here. The OFSTED was satisfatory but the new head wants it to be outstanding. We are all behind her.

All our dc really worked hard for their SATS and they're looking forward to the class treat later this term.

I'm very happy my dc will go to the comp with an outstanding OFSTED because I want for them what I never had.

My son has just sat SATs in year 6 and his school has been working towards them for a while. Whilst I don't give a monkeys why the government want him to sit them, I have found that they have had a really good focussing effect on my son - he has brought together his knowledge and understanding and given a real push in his final two terms of Junior school and I think without the SAT's these last 2 terms would have gone by with a bit of a whimper.

I don't know the reasons why this mum took her child out of school for his SAT's but I always feel for children who, by their parents actions are set apart from their peers. This age is about acceptancce and common ground amongst your age group and whilst I don't want my son to be a sheep - neither will I give kids ammunition to see him as different. I would also never want to put my child in the position where his teachers viewed him differentlybecause of my actions.

If your son is stressed by these tests then alleviate that at home by emphasizing the lack of consequences to these tests .

I think that it was misguided of the parent and a bit of a shame for the boy because (although I will be glad to see the end of them)they are quite a bonding thing.
However I don't see how it has any bearing on the other parents and I don't think that anyone should choose a school because of SATs results. Those at the top may have quite a different intake the next year-the school at the top of our LEA hasn't a chance of being top this year-same teachers but different children.

The parent,for whatever reason , decided that it was in her son's best interests not to sit the SATs.She has simply put her Ds's interests before the school's.

very annoying for the school and really sympathise with his teachers.But at the end of the day the school is there for the benefit of the children ,not vice versa.

YABU

I agree with kids mum, SATS are a terrible and harmful thing.

Quite apart from anyting else, her kid, her choice, none of your business. All your objections are ridiculous. "Bonding" indeed!

I don't have a child old enough to do SATs yet. However, towards the end of my stint at middle school(nearly 25 years ago), we were all marched one morning into the canteen where we sat for two hours doing tests. From what I understand of them they were pretty similar to SATs tests. We didn't know the tests were coming and we were never told how well (or otherwise) we had done. From discussing it later with my parents, I know that the results were used (in conjunction with teacers' reports) by the secondary schools as a guide to the level and capabilities of their future pupils. Testing children like this seems a pretty honest way of understanding what they can and can't do. Also of assessing how well the school has done with them. Using the raw data of the results (without naming names) could still form a league table if that's what parents really want in order to judge whether a school is good enough.

The biggest objections I have are the thicko parents on this site who bleat on and on every year about how they didn't get their child into such and such school based on the exam results

We can't have it both ways, either league table results are important and we base some of our decisions on them or they're not important and we send our children to the school based on other decisions.

DD took her SATS this week, her school were fab and didn't make a big deal of them. She had no anxiety because they handled it so well.

And I still think (as does dh (a teacher)that SATS are pointless.

If parents didn't whine on about wanting results and tests we wouldn't have them.

My dd (Yr 6) went to school Mon & Tues and on Wed was poorly with a temp etc. I called the school and told them that she wasn't very well, and arranged that she could go in for the test that day and come home in the afternoon to revise. She didn't in the end, as she didn't have the right books at home to revise with, apparently.

That night, she had all white spots on her tonsils, and again a high temp - I did some research and was advised by teachers that it wouldn't really be a problem to miss them, it's to judge the teaching standards, not the children etc.

So Thurs morning I called into school and said she wouldn't be in as she has tonsillitis.

Between 08:30 and 09:30 that morning, the Head rang me 3 TIMES, insisting that dd came in to do her tests, and if not, the teacher would come to our house and supervise her while she took the remainder of the tests

Obviously I was livid! I called the Education Welfare Officer, who advised me that the Head was being ridiculous, and that of course dd should be off if she was ill.

I took great pleasure in telling the Head that dd would not be attending.

It's a good job they're being scrapped, because when it's ds's turn, I would be withdrawing him too. For the whole week.

Well I don't whine on about wanting tests and results! I will be choosing a school for DD (if she ever goes to one as she is HE) based mainly on distance from home and atmosphere in the school itself when we look round it. Preferably on a normal day not an open evening.

I know this is naive, but until recently I genuinely thought that was how everybody chose their DC's school.

"SATS are a terrible and harmful thing"

Look, I'm no fan of them by any means, but I think this is a bit OTT. There are many terrible and harmful things out there in the world, but sitting at a table answering some questions about stuff you've been learning about in school doesn't really compare.

"The biggest objections I have are the thicko parents on this site who bleat on and on every year about how they didn't get their child into such and such school based on the exam results hmm"

Thicko. Gosh, aren't you the charmer.

My DD wont being going to school AT ALL, not because I don't have every confidence in her acing every test she is set, but because I think this over reliance on testing is getting out of hand. Our schools are nothing more than rote recital, indoctrination and testing centres. They do not even approximate what I would call an education. They certainly don't facillitate learning.

To paraphrase a popular song from the 70's- LEAVE THE BLOODY KIDS ALONE.

I think the mother is right.

Putting primary school children through state exams just so the government can harm schools with relentless monitoring of so-called "standards" is unjustifiable IMO.

I don't think they do SATs where I live, but if they do I will not let any of my children sit them.

"Look, I'm no fan of them by any means, but I think this is a bit OTT. There are many terrible and harmful things out there in the world, but sitting at a table answering some questions about stuff you've been learning about in school doesn't really compare."

Suggest you check out this book. Then get back to me.

Maybe if more parents had the balls to withdraw their kids from a test that does not benefit their children, SATS would be scrapped much more quickly. At least that mother had the courage of her convictions.

Whether the parents puts her child in a situation where they miss out on a collective treat etc is up t her and the child - if she gives him a say.

The school CLEARLY hypes the children by bribery etc to get results which will give it league table status (and many, perhaps most, do. I'm not singling this school out for criticism!), SATS results are for the benefit of the school, not the children, and unless you have your house price in mind, I'm not sure why it is any business of yours!

She has been a bit unstrategic - she should have taken him out fo the practice weeks, and the mocks, if she really doesn't like it.

I am no fan of SATS, but probably won't go this far when it is DS's turn, and don't generally agree with taking children out of school in term time. But that's me, for DS - what other parents do is not my business.

Thanks dizie - I am terribly charming.

And how nice of you to quote one sentence I wrote instead of referencing it to the rest of what I said.

You know the part where I said SATS are pointless - the part where you actually agree with me!!!!

League tables are a useless indicator of how good a school is. If people didn't focus on that then we would be able to get back to person-centred learning - which that book you espouse agrees with.

I wanna say:

YABU: the lady is entitled to her principles.

and

YANBU, because OP is right, she has undermined the school and if you think the school is a great place, it's fair for you to feel annoyed with people who do things to harm it.

Oh dear -- I think that's a sitting on the fence reply, isn't it? I'm about neutral on the idea of SATs in principle, too!

I am kind of on the fence too lljkk.

Do agree with dizietsma about the "rote learning" sats don't really test a child's genuine intellectual ability in that subject do they? Merely how well they can regurgitate the info they have just been told by their teacher.
I particularly find this applies to literacy where it is possiblre for a child to get high marks by "ticking all the boxes" as it were ie using varied punctuation, neat joined handwriting etc where in reality the definition of a great writer is one who has a vivid imagination and can actually write a piece that is interesting!!!

I didn't actually mean for my original post to be a defence of the National Curriculum or the content of the SATs. I think everyone is aware the system needs to be changed, and it is about to be completely overhauled at primary school level.

I didn't choose the school based on league table results; it had poor results at the time my DS started. A tiny primary school has huge changes in league table position from year to year anyway.

My post is about the effect it has had on the children in the class, who had been encouraged by the school to think the SATs were a team effort, not about individual results. It sets the example that you can break the rules, and in this case the law, and nothing will happen to you.

"My post is about the effect it has had on the children in the class, who had been encouraged by the school to think the SATs were a team effort, not about individual results"

I do get your point but I think the school is in the wrong if they are making SATs out to be some massive undertaking to the children, that requires them to take on this huge responsibility to the school in order to ensure its position in the league tables. That really bothers me.

SATs are meant to be about establishing where the individual child is academically. So the purpose of them is being distorted for the benefit of the institution rather than the children, and I really can't find it in me to disagree with the mother's decision to remove her DS from the school for that week.

SATs are not a team effort at all; they are about individual pupil performance on which the school, not the pupil, is judged. The best team in the world won't help 'Little Johnnie' get a L4 if he has only been learning English for six months, or whatever.

SATs are ridiculous because they are unfairly or badly marked and because the English SATs in particular have always been inconsistently set and often excluded pupils from showing what they had learned/were able to do because of poorly considered questions and arbritary application of highly subjective assessment criteria. The English ones at KS3 are also untiered, so pupils are expected to all fit into the same box and achieve, when questions suitable for a L7 candidate are totally unsuited to a L4 candidate and vice-versa.

I totally disagree with a parent taking a child out of school for a week unless ill and I totally disagree with a parent teaching their child that they are allowed to hide away from hard work and stuff that has to be done.

However, your arguments for why SATs are a good thing are really quite daft imho.

I never said SATs were a good thing! I am sure that there are far better ways of assessing children.

There are other aspects of school that I don't consider a good thing, but I don't think it would benefit my child or the other children if I told him he didn't have to do them. We can't all have our own way all the time.

"Do agree with dizietsma about the "rote learning" sats don't really test a child's genuine intellectual ability in that subject do they? Merely how well they can regurgitate the info they have just been told by their teacher."

That is what they are supposed to test.

janeite

"I totally disagree with a parent taking a child out of school for a week unless ill and I totally disagree with a parent teaching their child that they are allowed to hide away from hard work and stuff that has to be done."

I totally disagree with taking kids out of school for any reason other than illness.

However I make an exception for making a stand against a pernicious system like SATS.

Refusing to allow your child to be co-opted into a system, the effect of which is to make it impossible for teachers to do their job properly is not "hiding away from hard work". That child might be at home doing much harder work than those poxy tests demand.

If the mother didn't want her dc to do SATs then why send him to a school that does them?

She had a choice but instead chose to act in such a way that has potential ramifications for the school.