Can someone explain the tests controversy to me?

[ISaySteadyOn]

It seems there are two sides: all tests all the time or no tests ever. The truth lies between the two, doesn't it?

I honestly don't quite get it. So could someone give me an objective explanation, please? Thank you!

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

Thanks.

I'm now worried by the number of people that genuinely think the answer is 46. Or completely baffled would be more honest.

[mrz]

I finally remembered to check the book

The answer in the book is 65

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

A fact that the 'journalist' failed to check. Along with whether it is a misprint. They've ended the article assuming it might be which has left the comments open to all sort of weird reasoning to justify the answer of 46.

[mrz]

The question with the correct answer of 65 has been all over the Internet in those news articles about the new tests long before this thread (or the many others) started.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

Some of them seem to have convinced themselves that the answer is right but the question is wrong. Which sort of makes sense. Either the question or the answer has to be wrong.

Other that that, having read through most of the 1600 comments, I still don't understand their reasoning. It may hinge of the understanding of the words 'at the beginning.' Which might mean the point between the 19 getting off and the 17 getting on...or not.

[MrsKCastle]

I just don't get that way of thinking. How can they be disregarded when the question says ' to begin with'? Normally with this kind of discussion I understand both sides, but I really don't!

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

It's causing a debate on the IFL Science comments.

Lot of people seemingly arguing that the 19 can be disregarded since they got off the train, so the answer is 46.

[mrz]

Seems it was a misprint in the poster's book ...

[Ellison8996]

The poster said that it was 46...

[mrz]

It isn't a trick question. The answer is 65 as seen in numerous online versions.
and the Scholastic workbook it came from
63-17+19

[Ellison8996]

I think that's hard for key stage one maths.
There is absolutely no need to say who got off the train first, it can only have been put there as a trap./trick.

I'm not sure I know what they are asking, never mind a 6/7 year old.

[mrz]

www.theguardian.com/education/2016/may/10/fresh-humiliation-as-sats-answers-published-online-for-second-time?CMP=twt_gu

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

[Pipbin]

I would argue that there is were no people on the train to begin with.
The first lot of people must have got on at some point.

[mrz]

It's a case of waiting to see what a multi step word problem will look like in the actual test .

The amount of reading is a bit of a red herring as the question can be read (without numbers)

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

I think 27 might be simpler. Is it this one?

'Sita has 50 raisins. She gives 23 to Ben. She gives 15 to Amy. How many raisins does she have left.'

There's a less reading and you have the start number, rather than working backwards from the number she ended up with and trying to find what she started with.

The concept of giving meaning taking away might trip one or two up.

[mrz]

It's very similar to question 27 on the sample paper

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

I think the speed the changes were rolled out, 'forced' publishers to produce materials very quickly so there are likely to be errors.

I still think that question is more in line with the 'mastery with greater depth' type stuff from the mastery schemes though. All of the questions I have seen aimed at 'expected' yr 2 children is much simpler, both in terms of the way the question is written and the number of concepts being tested in a question.

[jennielou75]

I didn't bring the mark scheme home with me but can assure you I remember what it said as we were all annoyed by it!

[mrz]

.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

x-posts. If you know there are mistakes in other resources from them, I'd take this as a mistake then.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

There's nothing of that complexity in the sample reasoning paper. Even without the bizarre questioning.

Are you sure the mark scheme is correct? The question specifically asks how many are on the train at the beginning, not after the first stop.

The answer can't be 46. They can't ignore the 19 because it's a key part of the question. It would still be an inverse calculation, it's just a two-step one rather than a single step.

[jennielou75]

Scholastic SATs practise papers. On one of their spag tests they describe compound words as suffixes.

[mrz]

Where's the question from?

[MrsKCastle]

Jennielou that test question is very bizarre. The answer has to be 65- at the beginning, before the first stop there were 2 more people on the train than there are now.