Practice mock SATs KS1

[LifeIsBetterInFlipFlops]

Does anyone download practice SATs tests to do at home with a YR2 pupil?

I'm a parent and would be keen to know whether other parents do this and if any teachers reading this think it a good idea?

Thanks in advance.

In year 6, children have been given mock test papers for each subject and told they must do it even if they are sat at the side of a pool. Failure to complete all papers and return them on the first day back (with exception of children off sick) will be disciplined.

Not at all. I could see which areas she found difficult. A parent can easily know more than teacher I would say. I know how she is doing at school and teacher says no need to so anything. Maths was a little behind English 6 months ago but not now.

The test paper doesn't cover the whole curriculum, but the teacher assessment does. So your help is targeted at a very small area of the overall assessment.

In Year 6 the tests are externally marked and levels are reported but in KS1 it is the teacher's assessment that is reported not the tests.

I would be very unhappy if a school threatened to discipline a child for being on holiday over Easter.

My child would not be doing them. Terrible practice - what exactly do they hope to achieve?

The test paper will cover most areas in the maths curriculum, so you can see which areas they are struggling with and which are easy, eg struggling with measurements or graphs or additions etc, then as a parent you can go over that area again. There's nothing narrow about covering a few areas of the maths curriculum. I agree the teacher will have to observe any improvement for it to count so it would have to be coveted again at school or in a test.

The test paper will cover most areas in the maths curriculum

No, it doesn't.

I agree the teacher will have to observe any improvement for it to count so it would have to be coveted again at school or in a test.

And if the improvement was only seen in a test, it wouldn't be enough evidence to contribute to a final level.

As feenie says the test papers cover a fraction of the actual maths curriculum so provide a very small snapshot of what the child knows or more importantly doesn't know.

Of course it does, there will be questions on measures, graphs, shapes, calculations, etc. they maybe big areas but you can see which kind of questions/concepts they find difficult.

Fgs, no it doesn't! It isn't even designed to, that's not what it is for.

No it doesn't ... a single test can only cover certain aspects of the curriculum a tiny window on what a child needs to know to be awarded the level.

I have explained why it does whereas you just say it doesn't.

Have you taught Y2, plainjayne?

But what you are saying is incorrect jayne.
There is much more to the curriculum than the type of questions that appear on the test papers. To include everything a child needs to know the test would need to be many times larger.
Yes the test includes questions that cover one aspect of measure and one aspect of shape and one aspect of data handling and some number work and some calculation work but only a tiny part of the whole level.

If all I had to cover in Y2 was the content of the test I could teach it in half a term.

And a test which really and truly did cover every aspect of the curriculum would need to be around 150 questions long!

jayne, hasn't it been made plain to you?
The end of year levels in year 2 are based on the teacher's assessment of your child work in class, not the tests.
Even if your dd got all of the questions right in a level 3 test paper, but her teacher had evidence in books that she was working at a 2a, then her final level would be a 2a. The test would be seen as an anomaly, probably due to practice at home.

But what I am saying is that if they get this one aspect of shape wrong then they are going to get all aspects wrong. Maybe a generalisation but with my dd it has been the case. There are areas stronger than others and the tests can show you this. Certain areas are very easy and she would get them right on any paper and vice versa.

But what I am saying is that if they get this one aspect of shape wrong then they are going to get all aspects wrong.

So you presumably taught the entire shape curriculum at level 3 to compensate? That's a little unlikely, don't you think?

I know how it works yes. Were the tests useful to identify weaknesses and improve them - yes.

The entire shape curriculum isn't that much, quite likely.

The shape and space curriculum at level 3 is quite a lot. Where are you looking?

Anyone can get a workbook and work through an area. I do have a first class degree from Oxford and a phd etc so I can manage to find out what a child needs to know to get a 3 in maths in any area.

This is the make-up of one of the L3 papers:
Place Value / Ordering 2 questions
Properties of Number / Sequences 2 questions
Fractions 1 question
Calculation (+) 2 questions
Calculation (-) 2 questions
Calculation (x) 4 questions
Calculation (÷) 3 questions
Missing Number Problems / Inverse 3 questions
Problem Solving / Reasoning 10 questions
Measures 1 question
Measures (Time) 1 question
Shape & Space 3 questions
Handling Data 3 questions

An individual's progress in specific parts of the maths curriculum can't be based on this - there just aren't enough questions in each strand.

But what about all the other possible weaknesses that the tests didn't identify because they weren't assessed?

"But what I am saying is that if they get this one aspect of shape wrong then they are going to get all aspects wrong." highly unlikely IMHE a child may be very good at identifying quadrilaterals but not so good at recognising reflective symmetry or positional language or classification or visualisation or ...