I'm not alone am I? How can I help my stressed, overtested Y6 dd to cope with the relentless pressure that comes from the school. Grrrrrr

[northender]

Apologies in advance for the long post.
Just that really. I'm not alone am I? Ds did Y6 3 years ago at the same school and it just bears no resemblance to what is going on this year as a result of the new testing system.
She is bright and in the top set for most things but that, apparently, is not enough. Already this school year they have been tested several times in each subject, in the hall, under exam conditions. Today they got results of an arithmetic test. Dd got 80% which she was pleased with but was then told she had to resit it today and if she didn't achieve 88% then she would have to do another test type exercise for homework. She missed history this afternoon as a result, to do the resit. Last half term she missed 2 sessions of history/geography to try to improve her reading comprehension skills.
Dd takes everything to heart and has taken a couple of hours to calm down tonight. She was upset and angry.This is not an isolated incident and although I recognise that dd's temperament does not help her, I can't see how this level of pressure is helpful in the long run. She seems like such a tortured soul at times and I feel pretty helpless. We have discussed with school how much to heart she takes things but I'm not sure they really get it as her teacher said to her today "Don't go home worrying about it"
We do lots of hopefully distracting stuff with her at home which she loves. She helps me with cooking & baking, is helping dh research my family history and does sewing & all sorts of crafty things with my mum. These things aren't forced on her but things she loves to do. In terms of formal extra curricular stuff she does drama and music both of which she loves.
I genuinely don't feel that going into school again will help, but as much as we say to her that it's not all about results, the school say the complete opposite.

If you've got to the end of my post then thank you

I spoke to the head at our secondary school and she said on average pupils will be sitting 30 exams every yea

Really? 150 exams over the course of five years, so one every week and a half? They weren't exaggerating much, were they?

One of the less attractive aspects of the teaching profession is the endless catastrophising. Every initiative, no matter who it comes from, is always wrong. Phonics? Wrong. Numeracy hour? Wrong. Change from O Level to GCSE? Wrong. In every case, the outcome will be a lost generation of children, every teacher resigning and the streets of our cities filled with zombies. And educational outcomes continue rise on most metrics.

Quite right bearleftmonkeyright - I could cry too at what we are doing to our children and wonder what it will take to stop it. My 'booster' lessons were for the weaker children who needed a bit of extra help to get level 4 and so it was some use to them , although I would have liked to have been able to do away with 'for a level 4 you need to ...........'.
OP's DD does not need any of that - she should be enjoying school and have a love of learning.
The school is either wanting to be 'Outstanding' or wanting to stay 'outstanding' and the silly thing is that I would no longer want my child at an 'outstanding school' - the pressures on everyone will be too great.

13 subjects X 6 terms per year the head could be significantly underestimating the number of tests children face in secondary.

He has sat an exam in every subject already over the last week. There are two for English. That will happen again in the summer term, tell me again how that is exaggerating. I really wish it was. He is only year 7. This is happening.

I think perhaps Ricardian voted Tory and admires Nicky 'Mouth full of marbles' Morgan. It sounds that way.

Ah well!

As a teacher I am appalled to hear that your child is being put under this stress. Yes she will be tested a lot through secondary, but it is more spread out and I have never given a child a re-sit for getting less than 80% unless I completely knew they flunked it and deserved a second chance, this would still be optional though. Plus yes they are all tested at the start of year 7, as we have to show a baseline to make GCSE predictions from and do not trust SATS due to all the hot housing that a lot forget over the summer anyway.
As a parent I would have been banging on the school door wanting to know why they have pulled her out of other subjects and making her re-sit. I would also now be telling my child to refuse to do them. I would also be booking some 'important appointments' that happen to clash with any future testing. If you collect your child after register is closed, it does not affect their attendance percentage and you can not be fined.
Sorry about the rant, I rarely comment on here, but this made me very angry. Get into school on Monday and set the score straight about YOUR expectations as a parent.

The new curriculum was published last year Washediris but the sample tests were not. They are quite different and, in the case of the SPaG, quite shocking in the increase in expectation. It is not entirely the case that if a school has thoroughly prepared the new curriculum the kids would be fine in the tests- they do need to be taught techniques to get the best out of their knowledge in those tests, which means making them practise. I don't like it, but it's what we have to do.

However;

In that case, it must be about numbers being allowed to pass rather than children meeting the criteria to pass. Call it what you like.

Plus yes they are all tested at the start of year 7, as we have to show a baseline to make GCSE predictions from and do not trust SATS due to all the hot housing that a lot forget over the summer anyway.

We are pushing them through tests that only a certain number will be allowed to pass, thus branding a vast swathe of them failures however hard they work- then, in just 6 weeks, the whole exercise is disregarded.

It is depressing.

How do you cover a six year curriculum in two?

The way the questions are being asked in the sample tests is quite different. For example, in the Maths there are a lot of 'is this answer correct? Explain how you know...' type questions. The pupils are just not used to this type of question so there is a lot of additional work needed to prep them in how to apply their maths knowledge to them (just one example, there are many differences of this type).

I have Y6 pupils who I also had last year in Y5. Pupils who were comfortably achieving a 5b on old practise papers (so good at grammar you might say) could only attempt 1/2 - 3/4 of the sample SPaG paper.

So, to reiterate my previous post, just knowing the content of the new curriculum does not mean a pupil will do well on these new tests. Hence many schools will opt for a year of 'teaching to the test' to ensure their pupils can score well on the new formats.

Sorry, I see your confusion Washediris. I don't mean the new tests are different to the new curriculum.

I mean the new tests are quite different in format to the old tests. So, previously pupils would probably have been taking optional SATs papers and occasionally doing individual past paper questions right from Year 3 and as such being pretty familiar with the SATs format by the time they hit Year 6.

This set of Year 6 pupils (and teachers) have a whole new format and style of questioning to get used to in the space of a few months on top of learning the considerably ramped up content.

I think perhaps Ricardian voted Tory

As a point of information I'm a long-standing member of the Labour Party.

But assuming anyone who disagrees with you is a Tory probably makes you feel better.

Really? 150 exams over the course of five years, so one every week and a half? They weren't exaggerating much, were they?

There are 6 assessment periods in most schools. While they might not call the assessments "examinations" they are very often hour long tests. Some schools may well have exams every 2 terms and it sounds like that school does this instead. 3 lots of 10 exams. Certainly not "catastrophising" - just the reality of the situation.

In year 7 at our school they have baseline tests (2 hours of general ones on the computer) and at least one hour in every other subject (2 in mine). With 10 subjects, that makes at least 13 hours of exams or assessments or whatever term you'd like to call it, within the first 3 weeks or so.

While they might not call the assessments "examinations" they are very often hour long tests.

So that's related to the new GCSEs because...?

I have spotted Nicky Morgan and am claiming my £5

Ricardian this thread is not only about the new GCSEs. If you read the OP you will see it started out as something else entirely. At 0844, bearleftmonkeyright made a point that you sneered at. I am, as you are very well aware, saying that point she made was correct. You said it was likely to be exaggerated- They weren't exaggerated much, were they - in response and I am saying no they are not. And, as mrz said, the head could be significantly underestimating. None of our points, including yours, were to do with the new GCSEs. But that's how a thread develops. The original post was not about the new GCSEs either.

If schools choose to test six times a year in 13 subjects that is their decision. It is nothing to do with changes to assessment being proposed at the moment.

Could the teaching profession please point to any Education secretary of the last fifty years they haven't hated, or any assessment scheme they don't regard as evil? Shouting Tory Tory Tory is all very well, but you hated Blunkett as well.

I quite liked Estelle Morris...

The problem is not with the profession hating education secretaries, but that education is so politicised. Any education secretary is always desperate to make their mark, but the time frame in which they need to operate does not allow for careful consideration or thorough research, so the decisions tend to be made very quickly, and both teachers and children are carried along on the tide regardless. It's wearing and most definitely not the best thing for our children.

Yes - Ken Clark was quite good. Estelle Morris was excellent.

Testing regularly was not linked to the new changes, but it has increased in the last 3 years or so, and that is because the focus of ofsted has been on proving progress. Within lesson observations this was supposed to be evident every 20 minutes a couple of years ago. Now not the case.

Can you show where someone said that regular testing is down to the new GCSEs?

You sound terribly angry about something Ricardian.

Spot on Feenie

or any assessment scheme they don't regard as evil?

The system for assessing KS1 up until last year was pretty good - thorough teacher assessment built up over a year, a small part of which would be a test chosen to match children's ability - one they could actually do.

As opposed to every Y2 child forced to sit every test (7) at the age of 6 or 7, regardless of ability, because they must all be given the 'opportunity' and, you know, you can just stop them if they become 'distressed', so what's the problem?

Before performance management based on student results and league tables, the GCSE was fine in my opinion. You worked your hardest but schools didnt put teachers under pressure to cheat, because the onus was still on the students to perform well and get their grades. Coursework was a good option for those who underperformed under exam conditions. Teachers were under no massive pressure to cheat because it was solely for the children's good. So they did their best and that was that.

Once the league tables and performance management by results came in, then the coursework and later controlled assessments became dodgy because there was so much at stake. That was when those GCSEs became ridiculous. Now they are all linear so no hassle about coursework of course, but 100% stress that the one or two exams they do in the subject will determine the 11 years of learning. That style does not suit the majority of people.

With the removal of levels schools are being encouraged to use termly/half termly testing to track progress Ricardian