in thinking our primary school should not bring back a teacher who went off ill in November for three weeks to admister the SATs and then go off again...

[Strix]

DD's year 2 teacher went off ill in November. They have had one single supply teacher since then who has worked out very well and provided continuity and the kids and the parents like her. It has just been announced that ill teacher is coming back part time for 4 weeks (half time with returning teacher and 1/2 with the temp cover teacher). Then returning teacher will teach the class full time for three weeks (when I believe the KS1 SATs will be given), and then she will begin her maternity leave and the temp teacher will resume full time for the rest of the year.

Several parent are unhappy about the dispruption to the kids.

Now, of course, the teacher has every right to come back to work. But, we feel she does not need to replace the teacher who has now settled with the year 2 class. I am especially unhappy about all this disruption being just in time for SATs.

"so it is not a sudden cram session in the few weeks running up to the assessment"

Yet you ask which 2D and 3D shapes she might encounter in the test???

If the class teacher has been off for 5 months (ie most of the year) then the school should have employed a teacher capable of administering the SATs themselves. I would put returning teacher to do something less stressful and crucial at this point in her life.

Anyway, SATs are a pile of poop, and you should not waste any sleep over them whatsoever.

What is your point, Clam? I have asked for a complete set of possible shapes and therefore we have not yet studied any of them? I'm just checking that there are not any I have overlooked.

She knows the following (I think):
rectangle
quadrilateral
triangle
pentagon
hexagon
heptagon
octagon

She knows the number of sides and the number of corners/points/angles (what the heck do you call them in this country??)

For 3D, we know

(inset on of above)-based pyramid
cone
sphere
cuboid
cube
(insert one of above)al prism

Now what might appear that I have forgotten? Incidentally, shapes are her favourite. Think we might cut some out, paste them together and colour them for fun this weekend. She wants to make a dodecahedron for her friend who told her about this novel 12-sided shape.

I think they use the term vertex/vertices for corner/s

I'm sorry for not reading the whole thread first but if you really believe there is a gender bias, you need to march into the school and say so (although hopefully in a constructive/diplomatic fashion!) That is much more disturbing and likely to have an impact on your DD than this minor teacher switcheroo! Is there really a 'girls can't do maths' attitude? that just seems so utterly ridiculous that i almost can't believe it (not saying you're lying it's just shocking to imagine!) especially not in a primary school where there will be clear evidence of girls being able to do maths exhibited on a daily basis...

All of those shapes are fine. We would say corners in KS1 but vertices further into KS2. R.e. 3D shapes - count corners/vertices, number of edges (not sides) and the number/shape of faces.

Ooh, forgot cylinder - quite common in Y2.

Thanks, Feenie.

Sides was my way of saying faces actually. I'm probably confusing DD.

Have you seen Mathszone, Strix? Has games on every conceivable Maths topic, it's really good.

No, I hadn't seen that, thanks.

I have been thinking about the comments on this thread which point out my real problem is the school's attitude towards math and girls. You are all right. I think my drive for SAT performance is a knee jerk reaction to my frustration with these ignorant attitudes towards math and girls.

I do need to consider what I might do about it that doesn't result in me expecting my 7 year old to bear the burden of the responsibility... the problem here is the school, and not the child.

Oops...loving that Freudian slip (my bolding)...

"For 3D, we know

(inset on of above)-based pyramid
cone
sphere..."

Whose homework is this? Am just teasing...we all do it. But, you know, this is just cramming for the test and has nothing to do with a love for and an ability to do maths. I do realise you said this was a necessary step to get into the 'right' set next year.

And I am so with you on girls and maths - as a mathie myself I am passionate on ensuring girls do maths and science.

Out of interest, what is it the school has said or done that leads you to believe that it has the attitude that boys are better than girls at maths? It staggers me that this could be the case in this day and age.