New SATs test on times tables

[BatmanLovesBaubles]

TES link

First three paragraphs:

All children will be tested on their times tables as part of their KS2 Sats, under new plans unveiled by education secretary Nicky Morgan this morning.

The tests will examine multiplication skills in every 11-year-old as part of ministers' "war on innumeracy and illiteracy", the Department for Education said.

Pupils will expected to know all tables up to 12x12, with the skill measured using an "on-screen check" examination to be piloted by 3,000 students in 80 schools this summer before being rolled out across English primaries in 2017.

I am so cross about this.

1. Why remove the Mental Maths test (which did test times tables)
2. More timed tests are NOT what we should be doing at primary where many children already feel under pressure
3. Maths is an area where children often panic and their minds become blank - this is really not going to help
4. What happened to Nicky Morgan's promise that nothing new would be introduced?

I am so, so angry right now

Some heads will undoubtedly use it to set targets for Y6 teachers

My performance management targets are already set based on SATS results, whatever national levels were last year plus 2%. Here's another one to judge against!

That's crazy spaniel! Surely targets should be based on the current data for the current cohort. I hate this insistence on treating every cohort as if they're the same.

It's all gone totally mad.

How do they come up with that one.

The cohort of pupils are also taught by a cohort of teachers

No, the view is that I can't be set targets that are less than national averages, as that would mean that the school is targetting its results to be below national averages and to be a Good school you have to be above national averages, so OFSTED will start to sniff around! As I teach year 5/6, no matter what they come into year 5 at, they have to leave year 6 above average! At least I have 2 years to get them sorted! Last year 14% of my year 6 group had Statements, it' was bloody hard achieving 85% with the rest!

times and the current method for rating or slating measuring that cohort of teachers has sweet fa to do with teaching ability for the majority. The cohort of teachers is judged on their ability to tick the right boxes in whichever bull guidelines and targets are in favour, and on the cohort they teach. And so for the most part any measurement of performance is inaccurate and beyond the teachers control.

And if you achieve it they'll just set you a higher target next year?

It makes no sense on so many levels. How does it work this year with a completely new assessment system and last years national averages being irrelevant?

Crikey seems like teachers dont like being set targets, but its how the world works and how improvements are made. 2% above average seems like a reasonable target, of course everyone wont reach it but the point is to TRY and reach it.

It's not being set targets that the issue, it's being set reasonable, relevant and achievable ones. And being put onto capability if you don't achieve them. In many schools no one seems to consider whether the targets actually make sense or have any point.

what's the big fuss, most children can (and do) learn these aged 6, 7, or 8, so why the outrage about testing something as basic at 11?

Lurkedforever1
you seem to dislike the term cohort when it is used to refer to teachers yet have no problem when using it to describe pupils
surely there are varying standards of teachers as well as varying standards of pupils

Having a high stakes times table test will mean that more able children are forced to waste their time learning something in year 6 that they knew in year 3.

Maths is more than tables. What about division?

Really Tired:

Times tables are NOT a high stakes test. If they learn them in Y3 and have forgotten them by Y6 then what the heck has the teacher been doing for three years? Gimme a break.

If teachers miss their targets, then are given support to help them achieve better next time then its all good, that's the whole point of targets. Its normal.

Year 6 sats are a high stakes test. If there is going to be a tables test then it should be much sooner than year 6. Maybe the test should be in year 4 with a possible result in year 5. If children forget their tables then they will fail their year 6 SATs.

I don't understand the complete obcession with multiplication. I want my child to be able to division, understand place value, add, subtract, problem solve, do percentages, ratios, measurement etc. multiplication is only one aspect of maths

"I don't understand the complete obcession with multiplication".

I disagree. I think multiplication is very important base for learning maths, including division, percentage, etc. Knowing and not knowing makes big difference.

It's not the content of the test that makes it high stakes it's what depends on the results.

If teachers miss their targets, then are given support to help them achieve better next time

Hahahahahaha. There's a bit of an assumption that that actually happens. It might happen outside schools and possibly even in some schools.

I think you might still be missing the point that some y6 teachers targets are reliant on the work that has gone on from R-y5, which they have no control over.

Its not a Pass Fail test, you cant fail your SATs, (unlike the 11+) where are the high stakes? The only material affect SATs have on a pupils life is to provide a heads up if they need extra support.

Unless you use a calculator, you cant do division, problem solving, percentages, ratios, and pretty much everything in maths if you cant multiply two single digit numbers in your head. That's why its so important, ask a maths teacher.

So your saying teachers targets are dependent on team work with other teachers in your school. That's what the senior teachers are for and I imagine is included in their targets. A school can stand or fall on its heads abilities, sounds exactly like other sectors.

Not quite. The y6 teacher being responsible for y6 results and being the only class teacher to be judged on that is not exactly teamwork. Especially if the target you are given bares no resemblance to where the children already are at the beginning of the year. You could in theory get better than expected progress from the children and still fail your performance management targets because the children didn't make enough progress 2 years ago. Which might be an issue when it comes to performance related pay.

The SLT having ks2 SATs results as part of performance management makes more sense as long as the targets are achievable.

"Unless you use a calculator, you cant do division, problem solving, percentages, ratios, and pretty much everything in maths if you cant multiply two single digit numbers in your head. That's why its so important, ask a maths teacher."

Multiplication is not as important as number sense. Ask a maths teacher. Unless a child understands that division is the inverse of multiplication, knowing tables will not help them. A child is completely sunk if they do not understand place value. It's nice if a child understands why addition and multiplication are commutable operations, but 4-2 is not the same as 2-4.

Why the need to lightening speed. Professional mathematicians often think carefully rather than quickly. My fear is that the constant drilling for high stakes tests will suck the joy out if maths. There are people with dyspraxia who are very good mathematicians, but are not super fast.

nrich.maths.org/8773

nrich.maths.org/2469

Bolognese the new tests will be pass/fail in that children will be marked as working at the expected standard or having not achieved the expected standard ...

Times tables aren't maths - they're number facts, which, one committed to long term memory, provide a shortcut and accuracy in mental maths for a lifetime. Short term pain for long term gain.

Can anyone recommend a times tables CD? I hear these mentioned on mn.

I've wondered about homeschooling for year 6. It seems so much is SATs driven and stressful. Would my child really be at a disadvantage if they started secondary without having been drilled for SATs?