SATS Mocks!!!

[treas]

My 10 y.o. ds is in Yr 6 and so is approaching his SATs in May. Fortunately, exams / assessments are something he has always had no worries with - unlike myself, who became a complete wreck when taking exams.

However, in the last school newsletter we received dates for Yr 6 SATs Mocks in February, as well as receiving a request from the Head of English to support are children in ten items of written work in preparation for SATs (minimum of 1/2 hr per item).

I have always been one to encourage my children in their homework. However, since the start of Yr 6 my ds has not had any English homework other than spellings - which to be honest was a waste of time as ds, who was in the top group, already new them all - and handwriting in the form of copying out a paragraph.

Not once in the last two years has ds had to do any poetry or story work until now.

Is it me, or is this just cramming for cramming sake in order to massage the school's results. I am horrified that this amount of pressure is suddenly being heaped on these kids. Surely, the point of the SATs is to identify where the school is lacking in their teaching so that they can improve in the future.

Would it not have made more sense for the school to assign this homework weekly / fortnightly from September onward and then assess where the children needed more help - which would possibly mean no need for the additional pressure of mocks.

I'm really cross about this - pressure should not be shouldered by the children but by the teachers, who if they were teaching correctly would have no need to worry!

AIBU to think it unfair to have mocks and cramming ay 10 y.o. Should I make my feeling known to the school and if so what would be the best way to go about it.

Sorry so long , the bit of background info ran away from me.

YANBU - that really sucks. I would be well cross.

[goes off to find out what our school does in Y6....]

Treas, have you read SATS!! Should we feel so stressed? If not you might like to have a look at some of the replies I have had.

They have helped me to re assess. There are some valid points which you might like to raise with your school......good luck!!

The school has a responsiblilty to ensure the children have experienced what exam conditions are like, otherwise it can be very scary to a ten year old - desks in rows, no talking, papers opened only when the tests start, SATs police dropping in from the LEA , etc, etc. So the mock week is a good idea to sort all that out.

The ten pieces of work sucks though.

Today I received in the post a letter containing information about what the school is doing to prepare the children for SATs in order that they are not saturated and over-prepared.

This includes the mock week, a tips booklet including maths vocabulary and a science crib sheet, the 10 pieces of English work, booster classes for invited pupils, focus weeks and Easter holiday revision classes.

Now call me daft but could this be classed as over-preparation? Surely, the maths and science vocabulary should be used on a regular basis and taught in class? I thought that they teachers were the ones who were teaching not the parents!

With all these extra classes surely this is not going to be a true assessment of what the children have learnt.

Treas I think that way over the top...and the Sats are supposed to be a true reflection of teaching standards This is often why schools in middle class areas do better - pressure of the parents and kids rather than good teaching.

Treas, as I read all the messages re the SATs (yours, mine and recent others) I find myself becoming more and more cynical.

The process (in some cases) is immoral and although there is a need for teacher/school accountabilty much of what I read appears to be a step too far.

I am genuinely concerned for the emotional welfare of some of our children, in particular the ones who are less academic (at this moment in time). This could really switch them off from the enjoyment of learning.

I hope that these messages are read by influential people who can assess and make changes where necessary....somehow I doubt it!!

It comes down to the way the school handle the sats, not the validity of sats - as you have said, these are necessary for objective accountability of the schools. they should be run no differently to end of term tests, and should reflect the knowledge of the curriculum. If the children are feeling pressure, then the school is administering the tests incorrectly, and this should be addressed, not the existence of end of Junior tests, known as SATS. done correctly they should be almost unnoticed By children and just another test. It seems that because they are externally marked, the teachers rack up the pressure in some cases and this is not acceptable. But this method is wrong, not the test, and it sounds like this is what your school is doing and is wrong!

Can I just ask which you would prefer.
A child who has spent 10 weeks preparing for five days of testing in two subject.
Or,
a child who has to sit down to five days of tests.
Exam conditions s/he has never experienced before.
Exam papers they have never seen before in their lives.
Teachers who are under the most extreme pressure from the management because the school is judged upon the results of the test.

The SAT are not just for the school league tables. They are used to assess your childs progress and where they get placed at high school.

Like it or not they are very important for your child and perhaps rather than making it worse for your children's school you should help them get through it in the most positive way possible.

"they should be run no differently to end of term tests"

What end of term tests?

"If the children are feeling pressure, then the school is administering the tests incorrectly, and this should be addressed, not the existence of end of Junior tests, known as SATS. done correctly they should be almost unnoticed By children and just another test."

You have got to be kidding - you clearly know nothing about the procedures which exist for schools in administering them. The pressure can come from schools building it up unnecessarily, sure, but the way they are administered has absolutely nothing to do with the school, Watchtheclock - there are extremely strict rules as to how they must be administered (exactly like GCSEs/A-levels), dire penalties for those who break those rules (Heads have been prosecuted) and spot checks carried out by the LEA to ensure all this carried out to the letter.

Wot Ronshar said.

Surely assessment must be done to suit all learning needs and the development of the whole person must be taken into account.

We are talking about 10/11 year old children here.....the correct use of assessment can give a more accurate reflection of an individual's true potential/ability.

These tests cannot achieve that and I worry about the effect it has on everyone involved.

Feenie, just to be clear you misunderstand the point. what I said was the way the tests were administered could be wrong. what I clearly meant, if your read the context, is not that the technical/physical administration is wrong, because as you so politely pointed out, I would not know anything about that!, but that the administration meant the manner in which the children were prepared for the test can be wrong, however sometimes it can be done correctly, where the children are not put under undue pressure. If the curriculum that has been taught is secure, then there is no need for pressure, just some revision/practise which can only be good for the children as long as that is all it is.

As for end of term tests, this is what it says it is, end of term tests, do you not do these? Parents can have an opinion, as well as teachers you know! And do know when there children are not stressed by sats? And in my experience in ks2 and ks3 they were not, and as Said it is not the test but the way the achool prepares for it, and how well they have taught the curriculum before that counts, and after all that is the purpose of sats, to differentiate by these measures!

I would agree, but that's preparation for the tests, not administration which is very different.

No, we don't have end of term tests - we know exactly where the children are using rigorous teacher assessment.

Wasn't there talk of the Tories scrappong SATS? Will that eventually happen or are they likely to remain?

scrapping

They have promised to review the situation for next year, so the NAHT agreed to administer them this year.

The Tory manifesto spoke of rigorous testing though, so whatever the coalition replaces them with is unlikely to be very different, I wouldn't have thought.

Thanks Feenie

The problem is feenie if you don't have tests or sats then when the children face secondary tests right at the beginning of year 7, or entrance exams in year 6, then they will be very unprepared and possibly fazed -why should a child be any more ready for testing in the September of year 7 compared to May Year 6. they also give the secondary teacher an objective assessment to combine with their testing in year 7 to get the right level for the new secondary child. However rigorous teacher assessment is, it should always be supplemented by tests as a sanity check to ensure the knowledge is maintained in exam conditions, and any gaps are immediately visible.

Again, this should be just revision and testing of the taught curriculum, the fact that sometimes it isn't is the schools responsibility not the test.

I have no problem with tests, apart from the administration of them and also the way the data is used. I'm not saying they shouldn't be used at all.

The Y2 model is excellent. It was changed in 2005, and the feeling at the time was that KS2 SATs would follow suit. Y2 assessment uses a wealth of sound teacher assessment, moderated by LEAs (until this year, when funding was cut) and including test data. Therefore the test data is used to inform the teacher assessment (although usually it doesn't tell us anything we didn't know already) but isn't the be all and end all.

Optional SATs in Y3, Y4 and Y5 are fine - again as long as they aren't treated as the only assessment evidence, since they test just a very narrow focus. Used as part of asssessment data, they can be very useful. End of term testing is over the top though, imo, and is unnecessary if excellent teacher assessment is in place.

My problem is with the ridiculously over the top way that Y6 tests are administered, and the importance which is placed on results and how the data is used. League tables mean that there are many, many schools who teach to the test, totally denying their Y6 children a broad and balanced curriculumand doing the children no favours whatsoever. Teacher assessment is supposed to have 50% equal weighting, but it does not in reality.

"However rigorous teacher assessment is, it should always be supplemented by tests as a sanity check to ensure the knowledge is maintained in exam conditions, and any gaps are immediately visible."

A good teacher will very, very rarely discover any gaps using testing that they didn't know about already. It's our job!

I would like to see Y6 assessment follow the model of Y2 - moderated teacher assessment using testing as a supplement, but a many, many other pieces of evidence to back up judgements.

The problem is feenie that the model you are talking about i.e mainly teacher assessment is not used at any other stage of education? Right away in secondary they are tested, cats, sats, midyis etc... And it is good that the children have at least some experience in this type of testing.

the inherent problem with relying on teacher assessment is that you are relying on all teachers being excellent, and although lots are, it is just unrealistic to expect all to be. One objective test at the end of primary is not unreasonable? In some cases it will highlight a problem, and that it why the test is there.

In every profession there is an objective assessor at certain key stages, why not primary education? As said I totally agree that the tests should not be over prepared or interfere with the enjoyment of the curriculum, but if teacher assessments are correct and the learning is solid, there should be no. As you say
teacher assessment is 50%, so seems very reasonable and inclusive

External testing and not just teacher assessment is present throughout the Childs education, better to be familiar than not, and done not League tables, but a true reflection on the levels if learning at a particular school, which it should be If objective and teacher assessment are combined.

It is naive, i would suggest, to think league tables will not exist. Even if it was only teacher assessment people would still compile tables.

"the inherent problem with relying on teacher assessment is that you are relying on all teachers being excellent, and although lots are, it is just unrealistic to expect all to be"

Not so. Ofsted inspect it, LEAs can moderate it (and did up unitl last year), cross school moderation can be used (we did this with another school last year when we boycotted SATs), within school moderation can and should be used. There are a myriad of ways to check it is robust, and this is how it's been carried out in KS1 for years now, very successfully.

"In every profession there is an objective assessor at certain key stages, why not primary education?"

I haven't said that there shouldn't be an objective assessor - I said quite clearly that the tests and the teacher assessment should be combined - but if you think that external marking is in anyway accurate, then it is you who are being naive. I am forced to spend many hours applying for English re-marks every single year because the standard of marking is so poor - the year before last our marks went up 20% after re-marking (that's a lot in the league tables). Certainly not a 'true reflection' on the levels of learning at our school. This happens every single year, it's woeful.

The existence of league tables is the very reason for the ridiculous cramming that goes on in schools such as the OP's. But you can't 'cram' for teacher assessment so easily - it requires lots of evidence over time. Teacher assessment was included in the league tables for the first time this year - I don't think I would mind if it was the model of teacher assessment supplemented by tests.

I don't think our views are that far apart actually! But I am afraid I do not see the harm in external marking? I hear what you say on the accuracy but you could say that about any exam - entrance exams, cats, gcses, a levels - clearly marking can always have mistakes, whether internal or external, but no one thinks that external marking at gcse or alevel is wrong? That element of objectivity is important for comparison and validation.

At the end of the day sats are just a test and agree that tests are needed combined with assessment. if it's not sats it would be something else, the same but by another name! used sensibly they should be valuable.

I think anyone would have to admit the standard of marking is dire at Ks2 - I've never heard of a cohort of A-level results going up by 20% after re-marks, but it's a common complaint at KS2.

And yes, apart from a couple of points, I don't think our views are too dissimilar