Don't Test My 4 Year Old

[JamesEYFS]

Dear Parents

I've been lurking on Mumsnet for a little while but I think I may finally have something interesting to say.

I'm a teacher and a parent, in September I will be forced to conduct a baseline test with children new to school. The test is not for me or your child! It is there to generate data that the government and DfE are yet to make clear how they will use.

I, like many other teachers, academics and parents, feel that is wrong. If you do not wish your child to sit this test in September it is important to inform your new school as soon as possible. I've written an example letter/email in my blog post below.

www.jameseyfs.com/blog-1/don-t-test-my-4-year-old

I hope it's useful. I'd love to hear from you if you get a reply from your school!

My children are older and I can't be bothered to read the links.

I have no problem whatsoever with a standardised baseline assessment when children start school. It seems only reasonable to me. Then schools can get credit for bringing children on well, and LAs/whoever can also see where pre-school assistance is needed most.

I will happily let practitioners argue about the best way to do these in such a way as they can be useful for things other than data, or to make them more efficient. But if someone starts arguing from a 'Don't test my 4 year old' then they've lost me before they begin.

unless your child is born in the autumn term, will not be of compulsory school age.
Not true
"Children becoming 5 years old between 1st January and 31st March are of compulsory school age at the beginning of the term after 1st April."

I would also be concerned how this will affect the youngest.

I would be surprised if schools do this baseline accurately as any extra that 'exceed' will have high targets for yr 6.
Tbh though i would have thought it wasnt in schools' interests to have done well at ks1 either.
So maybe this will lead to more of a push from the start of yr r on.

I think what a child is like at 4.0yo should be irrelevant

4 years olds starting school in September are all different. I just don't see the problem testing where they are. Normally, Autumn born are more mature and doing well, but it's not always the case. What's wrong with teacher finding out children's ability at the start of the school?

you're right supersonic Teachers will assess all children when they start school so they can plan for individual needs and no one is disagreeing that this is not necessary/desirable. One of the issue is that the DfE is introducing tests that won't be used for the child's benefit (teachers won't see the results) but simply as a measure of progress from start of primary to the end of primary.

anothef reason to go private- the pressure kids in state schools are on and the teaching to the test is just horrendous ( a friends 6 year old recently was in tears every morning due to ks1sats...)
what a strange world where many preps are much more relaxed than state schools - and get better results)

If a child was crying during KS1 SATs that says a lot about the school/teacher rather than about the assessment. In the majority of schools KS1 SATs are very low key as the test results are purely for the class teacher and not reported

Well, if you want your DC to have a pass/fail exam at 3+/4+ then the selective part of the private sector will be right up your street.

Not to mention 7+/8+ stresses (not just transfer, but weeding also) the biggies of 11+ or 13+ transfer, and the ability of the schools to 'counsel' someone out at any point.

Supersonic - I agree that across the country the differences in initial attainment due to birth month will even out, but with small sample sizes of 30 kids in a year (or even 60 kids), the progress data just won't be reliable because each individual kid will have a big effect on their school. Some rural schools have very small cohorts. It is perfectly possible that having 5 kids born in the autumn term out of a year of 10 pupils will make a school's data look terrible. Quite apart from the ethics of testing 4 year old, the system isn't a valid method for measuring progress at a school level, unless the dfe are planning to do something clever around weighting progress scores according to month of birth. (And having worked in dfe I know that not everyone who should, really understands how progress data in primary schools works.)

@SquirmOfEels that’s a tiny minority in the private sector. Selective schools are cheating - any school who manages kids out or selects can perform well.
I guess as usual it depends on the school, but most state primary schools around here are a lot more obviously test driven than private (for the kids)

An interesting suggestion was to do the test in the term the children turns 5. It would then be more like a 5 year check.

How does that make it any fairer? There’s going to be a huge difference between a September born who is assessed at the start of the school year and a summer born who takes the test at the same chronological age but with a year of school behind them. The reception year makes a huge difference.

I'm concerned how this could filter down to affect the culture of pre-schools. Pressure to push formal learning/academics ever earlier? - whether from practitioners themselves, or more likely the market in the shape of parents anxious their DCs should perform "well" in the test on entering Year R...

No school will want their reception cohort to be performing strongly when they join reception. It will make it harder for the school to demonstrate good progress.

That's just cobblers - no one minds when they have a strong Y2 cohort.

Whether it's a minority depends where you are. The parts of the country with most private schools, and the highest proportion of families using private schools are all London boroughs (by a considerable margin, in some cases) and selection (at entry, or by weeding) is very much the norm.

Yes, if you can find a non-selective, nob-weeding school it will have quite different and far fewer pressure points (probably only transfer, if not a through school) and public exams.

The state sector was rather like this back in the 1970s, with transfer exams only in counties retaining grammars, then O level/CSEs and A levels. Parents only really know objectively how their DC were doing when the school decided between O level/CSE, and that's quite a late point to be finding out.

I suppose the underlying question is whether you want schools policy and pedagogic practice to be evidence based, with pupils/families having some idea how the DC are doing when there's still plenty of time to intervene/support (then the question becomes when/how evidence is collected/used). Or whether that shouid not be onsidered as a worthwhile aim

Measuring pigs doesn't make them fatter, but measuring a generation of pigs with a reasonabky known diet will show which diners produce the plumpest and healthiest. Which is in the interests of many, many future pigs

I think this will lead only to cooking numbers by the school to artificially look good.
My daughter was assessed as being fantastically behind her age norm when she moved to the current pre-school at 3, allegedly unable to recognise colours, shapes, a single letter or an animal (the previous nursery, obviously, was lying to me). Now one year later she is, by their assessment, a fluent reader and scored 5/5 in all areas apart from emotional development. Looks fantastic on the paper.

I think that even a "check" on an ipad that risks making a child feel judged or worse, inadequate, during a time when they are getting used to their surroundings and key workers is madness.

Good teachers can get to know children in that first term. They don't need a test to do that. Government should be providing funding, not testing.

One of the issue is that the DfE is introducing tests that won't be used for the child's benefit (teachers won't see the results) but simply as a measure of progress from start of primary to the end of primary.

I don't see why the teacher would need to see the results? It's not an exam where the DC sit a test with their answers sealed in an envelope - the teacher is sitting there observing the child and entering their response, so how could they fail to know how each child has done? What's to stop them making their their own notes and using the assessment as a part of their observations of where each child is at? Sending a report/results back to the teacher seems to me to be a waste of both time and resource.
A teacher spending 30mins of 1:1 time with each child, observing each doing the same tasks, does not strike me as a 'bad thing' - it could well be quite a 'useful thing'. Any decent teacher is capable of doing this in a way that the child feels relaxed and enjoys it. Most DC LOVE 1:1 time with their teacher at this age.

I don't work in education, but I do have experience of instruments used to measure success/progress (mostly in healthcare ) and you do need a baseline if you want to make an evidence based assessment. The results are not used to make decisions for individuals (although they can certainly contribute to that) but used to make decisions for entire cohorts.

Schools already do a baseline that is used to support the child's development. These baselines are made by interacting and observing the child over a period of time (days not minutes) not by a 20 minute test which depending on the child's mood and health mayor may not actually reflect what the child knows and can do.

thankfully I do not have a child that age. I personally would not like this.

silvercookoo I know what you mean about keeping kids behind on paper. A child in DS class is extremely gifted and he's also apparently only making averages. All this testing is a waste of time.
In addition, while I realise a little off topic, I know from experience where tests are manipulated to go a certain way to push through a diagnosis, and ignoring health concerns etc. HT at DS sons school even admitted it.

Firstly, how is a 'test' defined, specifially?
It is very healthy to carefully analyse any monitoring and assement material being implemented. It should be rigorously questioned; what is precisely being done, why is it being done (what will be the impact if it is not done) and what will be done with the results, etc. We should certainly not just accept and consent without intellectually examining it. The testing which takes place in Primary is already filled with illogical and damaging tests (the KS1 SATs having just completed, the utterly irrational Y1 Phonics Screening about to take place, and how the ultimate assessment of a school through its Y6 SAT manages to slide the pressure and anxiety onto the shoulders of 11 year-olds..).
There are only 2 people on this thread of opinions who are encouraging us all to research this matter further - and the fact that nearly all people wont, I would suggest, is one of the reasons why education is rife with ill-concieved tasks and irrantional policies.

https://www.nfer.ac.uk/for-schools/participate-in-research/information-about-the-201920-reception-baseline-assessment-pilot/

https://www.nfer.ac.uk/for-schools/participate-in-research/information-about-the-2018-reception-baseline-assessment-trial/