Resit Y6 tests in Y7

[Book1234]

Just wondering how many parents of children in Y6 are aware that they will be resitting the tests in Y7 if they fail them?

We still don't the fail / pass mark yet, but I'm not sure how widely the government has shared this information with schools.

Any thoughts?

New tests every time

Secondary school English HoD here and already worrying about this. It will make the children who didn't pass even further behind the rest of the cohort if we have to dedicate their English lessons to rote learning ridiculous grammar terms, which are mostly not referred to at all in secondary school, rather than embarking on the secondary curriculum like the rest of the cohort. The gap will widen rather than narrow with this in place.

We already do intensive intervention to accelerate learning with our really struggling students when they arrive. Having to teach to the SATs will seriously hamper the accelerated learning of key literacy skills.

Secondary school English HoD here and already worrying about this.

What would be the practical effect of doing nothing? Just tell the kids to go into the room, write their name on the paper and walk out? And repeat, each year? Given that some English HoD's had no problem doing that with English Literature in order to game the last round of GCSE progress measures, it hardly seem a capital crime.

The DfE certainly suggested that there would be some sort of stick for secondary schools failing to get kids through the hoop within three months.

There's already lots of chatter about "remedial classes"

In which case, noblegiraffe, one can sadly imagine a lot of rather unintended consequences, as school engage in bad stuff to rid themselves of those pupils likely to fail a second time. Who will, pretty much without exception (and almost by construction) fall into various SEN categories.

I hate the word remedial.

Sue Cowley's ten reasons why it's a stupid idea:

New school; new start. Please give them a chance.
They have just had a long summer holiday.
Someone somewhere will set up a ‘SATs Summer Revision Camp’.
They said that SATs wasn’t about ‘pass’ or ‘fail’.
They said that SATs was a measure of the school, not the child.
They said that child mental health was a priority.
Are they seriously measuring secondaries on what they can do in 3 months?
The first year of secondary should be an exciting time, not a PASS THE TEST time.
It is almost inevitable that the curriculum will be narrowed for these children.
It is a STUPID IDEA.
suecowley.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/a-stupid-idea/

It's a bit naive

They said Child mental health was a priority as the sacked the person responsible

Children entering Y7 are currently tested to breaking point by secondary schools

It was always about the child because they use the results to set GCSE targets

But it is a stupid idea!

It is almost inevitable that the curriculum will be narrowed for these children.

It's a crazy, stupid idea.

However, this particular point is somewhat disingenuous: nothing narrows the curriculum quite like illiteracy, and a child who cannot access the curriculum has bigger problems than its width.

Of course, the SATs as constructed don't test literacy, so that may not hold entirely true. But that in turns hinges on the definition of "failure". If that definition is very low, so children who "fail" are functionally illiterate, then fixing that surely has to be a priority, and that precise issue - children arriving into secondary with poor/no literacy and failing to access the subsequent curriculum - is hardly only a idee fixee of the right.

As far as I'm aware, the government mental health champion was a bit of of an interesting character.

Schools don't test y7s to breaking point. Not in this high stakes fashion.

Those GCSE targets that are set from KS2 results are an average performance measure for the school and should never be used to measure an individual child. Schools that do don't understand statistics.

But Bolograph, the resits are about maths as well as lots of other things that aren't basic literacy. If they were just concerned about literacy they cut a lot of other stuff out of the resit requirement.

Bolograph - you're right. Even worse than sitting extra tests is entering secondary not being able to read well enough for secondary.

Currently only the very worst children get interventions. For example in my school only pupils with a reading age below 9.

Yet you need a reading age of about 13 to read a science textbook. And most schools do nothing to help children who have a reading age between 9 and 13.

At least now something will be done to help those children. Although presumably not the right thing.

Those children who failed SATs will have serious problems at secondary. And pretending they won't is the worst of all scenarios.

So why are Y7 pupils and parents reporting that they do?

At the moments it's speculation because we don't know what children had to do to meet the expected standard but if we look at the interim standards children who last year would be high fliers will struggle to meet the criteria

Salty the reading texts have been analysed and the middle section was found to have a readability level of age 22!

So why are Y7 pupils and parents reporting that they do?

Because there is a cohort of parents - smaller in number than they think, as witness the distinct failure of the "SATS strike" - who believe that all testing is evil. That these parents often have good degrees from our better universities and have the time and money to worry about such issues by dint of those qualifications - ie, have benefitted from other people failing the exams they passed - is one of life's rich ironies.

This is worth reading (from this morning's Education Echo Chamber):

theconversation.com/good-tests-make-children-fail-heres-why-59329

I'm afraid those aren't the parents I'm talking about.

I'm talking about friends who have children in Y7 and 8 who haven't even heard about the proposed strike and would never have considered joining in any action.
I'm talking about parents of pupils I teach who have older siblings in local secondary schools.
I'm talking about colleagues with children this age who are fed up with test after test since their child moved to secondary.

Then maybe there is an issue with schools in your area, mrz? It's not a national problem as far as I'm aware. Yes, Y7s are tested on entering secondary school, baseline assessments, CATs and the like, but not to breaking point. The ones who are tested to breaking point (and beyond) are to be found higher up the school. Y7s do certainly have their own difficulties with stress but they usually relate to settling in, friends, organisation rather than tests.

It's not a national problem as far as I'm aware.

It certainly doesn't square with my experience: CAT testing on entry, that's it. What other testing is there even available?

If friends were confined to my area I would agree with you

Those children who failed SATs will have serious problems at secondary. And pretending they won't is the worst of all scenarios.

I dunno, pretending that those serious problems can be fixed within three months during a major transition period thus heaping further stress on an already beleaguered system, while also adding in extra criteria also to be fixed within 3 months which won't cause serious problems at secondary sounds like the worst of all scenarios.

Although of course, noblegiraffe, just because the proposed solution is barmy doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist.

In 2015 89% of pupils achieved the expected level (or above) meaning 11% didn't achieve L4. That doesn't mean 11% are illiterate ...far from it.