Can we opt our DS out of taking SATs?

[sogrownup]

The pressure placed on DS (yr6) around the SATs is incredibly high. After much thought and anxiety we have decided to opt out of the whole 'pressure at home' side of these tests to create a little balance. The Easter Holidays will be void of any formal homework and will be about relaxing and learning through play........
If the school is taking part in the SATs is it mandatory for your child to sit them? Can we opt our child out? If we can do this, are there any horrendous consequences that we have not considered?
Thanks all......

what delicate little flowers!

Year 7 is going to be a bit of a shock! Or are you all going to keep your children home on the days they have tests then too?

I havent read any of the responses so my message is to the original post.

Surely the purpose of Sats is to guage where your child is at at this present moment in time, their understanding and knowledge etc.

If you dont teach/revise/train him to pass the tests then you will get a true and accurate record of his ability. I cant see the need or point to spend time stressing him out revising.

Whatever mark he gets means he will be put into the appropriate groups at high school but there is no point getting yourself anxious, and therefore your son will also be anxious. Whatever he knows or doesnt know matters, if he revises just for a test, then he is not solid in his knowledge anyway and this wont help when he gets to college.

So no I wouldnt boycott the test, I would allow him to take part and whatever will be will be

mike Some KS2 teachers raise eyebrows at the KS1 results, too, as KS1 teachers do for the foundation stage scores. It's life. But that's what we have to work with, and as all teachers know, test scores are only one part of the overall picture.
But I do think that you ought to make yourself aware of how to access the assessment data on your school's network, core subject teacher or not!

I had similar feelings to you OP. My DS was bored, bored, bored in year 6 because his school (IMO) placed too much importance on SATs. They pretty much did maths and literacy all year. They hardly did any history or geography, which became quite clear when he went to secondary. HW was just worksheet after worksheet.

I was quite happy when it looked there would be a boycott, but by the time the boycott was announced it was so close to SATs time that I actually felt I'd rather him sit the darn test since most of the school year had been taken up with preparation.

We certainly didn't do any extra work at home, just the HW. We didn't apply any pressure at home, just told him to do his best.

The results are sent to secondary school, but I believe most schools only use them as a guide to place children in sets and then carry out other tests during the first term.

The teachers did go on about how YR7 would be a wake up with all the HW and tests, but TBH my DS is a lot more interested in secondary education because they do so many more subjects. Thank goodness they've scrapped KS3 SATs!

Think they still do them though, bonkers, although I guess the results aren't published in the same way. And besides, they would only have affected maths, english and science lessons, none of the others at secondary level.

DS's school do use SATs along with CATs for streaming, they actually rang dc's primary and asked for raw scores. These raw scores can be seen on "eschool" along with their CAT scores and progress/ reports and targets. They are actually one of the few schools locally that get the new intake to sit CATs in the July before they start and use all that information (along with year 6 teachers advice) for setting from day 1 of year 7.

It is strange - the difference between schools.My dd is sitting the ks2 ones this year and should get level 5s.

She has seemed to quite enjoy the preparation, which has been low key. Just some past papers each week in one lesson for Maths and English since Christmas, which she finds quite easy.The English papers practice has been quite useful for working on timing and her finding out how the marking is allocated, but the Maths she could really already do without practice.

I've just kept track and how she is doing and encouraged her to do any set homework, but she doesn't feel any pressure.

She quite enjoys tests :o

The school that DD is (hopefully) going to has boycotted the tests for the last couple of years. What exactly does this mean? Does it mean they have absolutely nothing to do with them or do they still do them and not publish the results or what?

Don't think schools can boycott them this year, Gwendoline. A fair few did last year, but that was due to industrial action by unions. That's not happening this year so I think we're all back on them again.
Last year, schools who boycotted them did, in many cases, use the papers for their own information, but didn't post them off for external marking. Therefore the powers-that-be didn't have the results and the subsequent league tables were therefore inaccurate (or rather, even more misleading than usual). Schools did their Teacher Assessments as usual and reported those to senior schools.

The schools that boycotted them did their own.
I can't see the point of taking him away-he will have done all the work for them so it is a bit of an anticlimax to stay off school. I can't understand why there is any pressure-tell him there isn't-the results only really matter to the school. If he underperforms they will soon pick up on it in secondary school and have in in the right sets. You are making it out to be something it isn't.

The school that DD is (hopefully) going to has boycotted the tests for the last couple of years.

I doubt this was the case the year before last - had they done so then the Head would have faced a charge of maladministration. The only reason that the boycott happened last year was because they were protected by the fact that it was industrial action - and even then lots of heads were scared off at Ed Balls' threat of prosecution (he declared the action unlawful, but could not make this charge stick legally).

This year the Coalition agreed to review SATs before next year, so the NAHT and NUT agreed to wait for the outcome before bringing any more action.

clam Yes, they use them. I was trying to say that schools also use other forms of assessment to place children in sets, so children shouldn't be made to feel that if they perform poorly it will affect their secondary education.

I was actually talking about KS3 SATS - couldn't dominate the whole curriculum because of the stand-alone nature of the timetable.
But you're right about KS2.

It will not affect their secondary education-if they are in the wrong sets it will be picked up and rectified pretty quickly!

Ah ok, my information was wrong then.

After my ds did his year 6 SATS last summer, it only then dawned on me that the results are to no-one's advantage but the school's. They can only acheive a 100% figure if 100% of pupils take the test. Once my ds went to secondary school he was streamed in Maths anyway, and some pupils whose SATS bore little relevance to their ability were moved around until they were in the right class. It seems a shame to have him go through all the hard work, and then not be able to get any of the glory from taking them, but if he is ill on the day, keep him off! I remember one year, our glorious HT forced a girl who had just had pins put in her knees to come in and take the tests. I know if it were my dd I would have kept her tucked up in bed!

My school boycotted the KS2 SATs last year and many of the children cried

Mine were desperate for us NOT to boycott last year ( and we didn't!) and really keen this year too! As long as the teachers, parents and children all approach them in the "this is a chance to show how good we are" and ALL levels are celebrated, then I think the majority of children actually enjoy them. I have one boy working at level 2 who insists that he is going to sit them too, he refuses to be left out!

DS went to a primary school that didn't do any prep for SATs at all - he wasn't even aware he'd sat them last year, though he did very well. The school wasn't one of our chosen ones; initially I'd discounted it because of their poor results. But he had a much more holistic ethos to his education throughout primary than the other local children who'd got into our first choice, high performing school. Much more time to do interesting activities like art workshops and nature trips in KS2, when the other kids were stuck in the classroom doing practice papers.

Our school give the students lots of different tests throughout the year, but they never tell the kids the results, just do their own grading systems and teach accordingly.

The kids never learn how they did or didnt do, so have no idea about the pressure of tests. The school wants to know how much the kids know at that point in time.

Yet, the teachers feel pressurised because they have to test the kids so much and it takes time away from them teaching. they have to do the individual assessments as well which is very time consuming (as every teacher on here will know).

So what is the purpose? To keep some government bodies happy to see how kids are doing? Does it really help teachers to plan lessons better? I dont know.

I am torn, I personally like to know where my kids are at, what they are capable of, what do they know, what do they not understand, I like feedback from teachers. I do get this information because I ask, but my children have no idea because I dont relate any of the data back to them, my view is, if the school want the children to know, they will tell them.

I dont want my kids to feel pressured because they are over achieving, or under achieving, as long as whatever they are doing is their best and that is good enough.

From my understanding, SATS grades dont really mean anything. From my analysis, a child can gain a Level 5 in Maths or Literacy, yet be a long way from really understanding everything required at a Level 5.

Teachers test because it provides them with informtion about where there are gaps in learning and teaching. Without it they are in the dark about how best to improve standards. I am a a governor at a Junior school and they test and monitor teachers and pupils continually because otherwise they won't know how they are doing and what they need to do to get better. They produce a plan based on this analysis and this is reviewed regularly by the LEA inspectors. But it isn't only about how the school look, they want to know how individual children are doing so that they can be given individual help (or harder work if they are capable and need stretching) where they need it.

Of course the children don't know they are being tested most of the time, except for the end of year SATS style testing which every year does in the summer term to ascertain progress - only yr 6 get the extra pressure but they hope that by testing often and getting the children used to the exams the actual SATS themselves won't be a big deal, come Yr 6. Also, in the longer term, if the children can make steadier progress across the school they won't need to make Yr 6 so SATS focussed.

It really isn't just about the school - it might not be about the current Yr 6 because they don't get to benefit from the changes that are made but the children coming up behind them will, as the current Yr 6 did (hopefully) when older children were tested.

Schools have always tested - as I said earlier in the thread I was tested at the end of Yr 6 and that was 35 yrs ago. What has changed now is that it is more public but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Schools need to be accountable.

Teachers test because it provides them with informtion about where there are gaps in learning and teaching. Without it they are in the dark about how best to improve standards

I totally disagree - thorough and rigorous teacher assessment does not leave a good teacher in the dark. In fact, poor teachers often rely on testing for assessment because it is an easy way of assessing - yet gives only the narrowest snapshot of attainment.

I was using the broadest sense of the word test although I appreciate it might not be clear from what I said. Assessment of any kind involves testing, even if it isn't the written down, sit in silence, timed sort. Teachers should be testing understanding all the time before they move on to the next level. I am sure a good teacher can assess properly but not all teachers are good. Some are satsifactory with room for improvement, some are newly qualified and inexperienced. Some are even unsatisfactory and not doing their jobs properly. SATs, or formal testing can help find areas of weakness which can then be tackled by the school and the teachers to improve.

The problem areas that aren't always apparent. In DS's school they accurately predicted all the SATs levels their Yr 6 got last year except for a small handful. It turns out that one question on the maths paper was presented in a way that that children didn't get because they hadn't practiced that way and couldn't apply their knowledge to get the marks. That gap has now been filled. This year's cohort won't make the same mistakes again. No amount of teacher assessment would have picked up on that.

I am a teacher (newly qualified and inexperienced - though at 42 I don't feel that wet behind the ears) and I ASSESS children constantly. I TEST them almost never.

I record my assessments in various forms - maths and writing APP for a selected number, maths, writing, reading and science tracking for everyone. From the children's point of view, they always know what they have to do to improve, because I mark their work against objectives that I have shared with them and they understand. Every piece of work says where they have met their objectives, and one thing they need to do to improve.

I know exactly what each child in my class has to do next to improve, much more than a test would tell me (and with a range of levels within my single year class between P scales - below level 1 - and mid level 4 there is no single test that could possibly give me information about all of them in the way that this day to day observation, assessment and monitoring does)

Yes, it would - but it should have been on the curriculum and taught properly in the first place. There shouldn't be any gaps in the curriculum - and it shouldn't be left to a test in Y6 to find this out.

Any unsatisfactory teachers I have seen love tests - it's a one concrete way to test understanding, it's black and white, it's easy to administer. But testing only picks up on what's being tested in the first place, which can only ever be a very narrow snapshot. Thorough teacher assessment picks up gaps in learning at source, when they happen, and across the whole curriculum. Anyone relying on using tests to pick up on weak teaching is finding it out far too late, imo - much better to help a weaker teacher to use teacher assessment to help plan next steps and inform teaching from the beginning, and much better to steer them away from an over reliance in testing if possible.

One question on a Maths paper affecting a small handful of actual levels is rubbish, btw - one question is worth 2 marks at most - if all those children were really so borderline that those two marks affected their level, then they weren't securely working at that level in the first place.