SATs results - how important when deciding re primary schools?

[smother]

I'm about to submit my DD's application for primary school (state). We had decided on our 3 choices of schools based on visits, ofsted reports, talking to other parents etc.

I was feeling fairly happy with our choices but looking at the Sats results that came out today, our first choice school has done really badly compared to the other two - would that put you off? How much importance did you place on Sats results when choosing your DCs schools?

Ridiculous - they would still have had the teacher assessments, which if anything would be more accurate and tell them much more.

The high school has a fairly new headteacher and I think she is trying to prove something. In our LEA 12 out of the 13 high schools are below average. The local one is the 1 out of the 13 that isn't. I think the HT is trying to distance her school from the others.

The local primary schools are often accused of spending much of Year 6 practising for the Sats and they get great results. Consequently our local secondary schools test the kids again within the first week of Year 7 anyway because they don't trust the Sats results as they often give the impression that children are competent in a subject when in reality they were only really competent in the test.

Presumably the test they sit in year 7 also only proves they were competent in the test? So what is the difference between validity of year 6 and year 7 test, I suspect just that the year 6 teacher doesn't want to do it and the year 7 does!

Why would secondary school use another test in Year 7 - if they trusted the results of the Sats Tests in Yr 6...it's quite obvious they don't.

Most secondary schools use their own tests in year 7 - cat tests.

I would imagine that stats, cats results and teacher assessment all feed in to secondary school setting.

Everyone is tested every year at school anyway, SATs is just a standardisaton and objective recording of this, as is CATS for that matter. I really do not see the objection, which seems to stem from the external objective testing nature, as it is no different in Yesr 7 with CATS?. As said above, the teachers in year 7 just use a combination of all these results which is correct and much better than if they had no or little objective standardized information from prilmary!

"Most secondary schools use their own tests in year 7 - cat tests."

Not round here they don't - some use the SAT result, some use the teacher assessment, some group using mixed ability and set in Y8.

The main factors I used for deciding my children's school were the disctance I have to travel and the breakfast/after school provision. Happy mummy, happy children. Sats only happen twice (if you are unlucky), the school run is twice a day!

SATS were supposed to be an indicator for parents on how their child was doing within the National Curriculum and , as such, they are useful. They very swiftly became the material for league tables and it only takes 5 or 6 in a class of 25 for a school to fall below the national average. The figures don't really tell you why this half dozen didn't meet target.

Schools take different approaches. One school might concentrate on getting as many as possible up to average and short-change the above average pupils. Another school might not give a stuff about SATS results and still get brilliant scores.

Look for a happy school. Use your ears when you visit. A good noise is a low level working hum punctuated by bursts of laughter.

Sats at KS2 are not about factual recall it's about learning key skills.
Hothousing is only an issue if the school are neglecting other areas of the curriculum and this will be obvious from the ofsted report (not enough teaching arts / sciences / ict etc)
Sats are just testing basic skills, the very things we send our children to school to acquire along with good social skills. All the rest is nice but not essential to future success.
If a school is sending 100% of it's children out with the ability to write, read and manipulate numbers at a level appropriate for their age (and obviously tallying the lower levels achieved to the numbers of children with serious learning difficulties) then that school has not failed a single child in preparation for secondary school which is all about getting those important pieces of paper that will make them competitive in the economy.
If a school has provided outstanding pastoral care, nice facilities and field trips etc but only 70% of the kids are getting the right grades then that's a lot of children who aren't ready for the tough ride of secondary school, and who lack the most essential skills we need to function in society.
Research has clearly shown the importance of early education in later life outcomes and nobody wants their child to live a difficult life full of stress and hand to mouth existence.

Also to be honest, if a school is failing in one area, it's unlikely to be high achieving in many others as it suggests a rather relaxed attitude to recruiting the best teachers and implementing the best policies to help children achieve their best.

I know one of our local schools has just had an outstanding ofsted inspection but only got 58% in their stats

Not 'just' - that wouldn't be possible under the new schedule. Must have at least been last academic year.

feenie, this is an old thread.

Thanks, Galena - grrr!