Booster lessons for SATs

[Barnowls]

Hi
I'm after opinions on schools paying for external companies to come in and deliver booster lessons to year 6 kids to prep them for SATs?
Why would schools who can barely afford to heat the classrooms throw money at this?

What's your editor's opinion OP?

I feel it's more for the school's benefit than the kids, but that may be because I'm annoyed they have the money for this but not to assess my son for dyslexia. He's been struggling for ages and I finally paid for a private diagnosis (well, my lovely mum did) and now hopefully he will start getting the support he needs. But what about all the kids whose parents can't do that?

This angers me because I'm not actually sure what the SATs exams achieve other than to inform secondary schools as to what level children are working at. Can't Primary teachers do that? My eldest didn't do SATs due to Covid and has managed very well at secondary!

When I did my SATs in year six, I was told not to worry about them at all. They are designed to assess schools and teacher performance. If that's true then surely schools paying for booster sessions to be provided is mainly for the schools benefit.
Having said all that, I guess a few extra booster sessions never harmed anyone's learning regardless of the reason behind them.

The money could be ringfenced to be used for extra support. For example, pupil premium. This can’t be spent on heating. The school website should have a pupil premium report detailing how that funding is spent.

A dyslexia diagnosis isn’t needed for support to be put in place for a child in school. That is why schools will not usually pay for these expensive assessments.

Is the school still spending its covid recovery money?

True, I suppose any extra help must be a good thing.

The school is classed as being in a deprived area so you may well be right, I hadn't thought of that.
Re the dyslexia- school insisted he wasn't so only very limited extra support put in place for his dufficulties in reading etc. And dyslexia is a specific learning difficulty so children will need various adjustments to their teaching which just won't happen if they don't believe he's Dyslexic.

I'm not sure, but maybe this is part of the levelling-up funding.

However, they did the same 5 years ago when DD was in year 5/6. Refused to help with any prep for the 11 plus, but then threw money/resources at SATs prep.

From what I can gather some schools have been boosting for Sats since the beginning of Year 6 to the detriment of proper teaching and learning. Madness.

@Barnowls 11 plus is a choice. State schools don’t do this in my experience. The teachers should be teaching the curriculum and ensuring each Dc makes good progress. An external company is a really odd way to spend money in my view but it could be pp funded.

I never heard of this being done OP … is it for the whole class? what are they teaching… actual core learning or is it more exam technique?

either way, seems wrong

Haven’t heard of schools bringing in outside staff, in my experience booster classes are taught by school staff ( who should and do get paid ) because they know the children, know how the school teaches, and know what needs to be covered.

Are you sure it's not Covid catch up money from the government? My year 6 DD is having maths booster tutoring and the secondary school I work at is still spending the Covid money on maths tutoring for those who need it.

It is often focussed on “borderline children” , eg working at a solid 3 but could be a 4. Often focused on exam technique, how to read questions, how to tackle particular sorts of questions, but will also revisit areas of the curriculum. The sort of thing that no one bats an eyelid when 11+ tutors do the same sort of teaching.

11+ is a parent choice and nothing to do with the primary school generally. No different to not providing support for those doing entrance exams for private schools, etc.

SATs aren't - they are something all state schools have to do with (almost) every child.

Sadly the government and ofsted places so much on SATs these days that some schools really do go over the top when they are due.

They put a lot more emphasis on progress. Sats might be the end result but how Dc get there is most important. That shows great teaching. Not clever Dc who are coasting. This is why many outstanding schools are no longer outstanding despite great sats results.

Schools have covid catch up money that has to be spent on narrowing the gap caused by covid. They have to justify and prove what they have spent the money on. If gaps have been identified in Y6, then paying someone to close these before the children go to secondary school is a perfectly acceptable use of money.

I know that's true, but kids at private prep schools spend years being trained to pass the 11 plus. It seems unfair that children from less affluent backgrounds are put at such a disadvantage. Getting poor kids into excellent grammar schools would surely be a good way of tackling inequality.

Sorry, I clearly don't have the hang of replying to specific posters!! That was in response to Abraxan's post about the 11+

The school website will have a covid catch up plan in it. You can have a look and see if thsts how they are spendingbthe money.

But schools aren't judged on how many kids they get to pass 11+. They are judged on SATS outcomes hence they put their resources into SATS prep. That's the effect league tables and Ofsted have, instead of blaming through school blame the government for imposing these measures. Most areas in the country no longer have grammar schools either.

Some grammars reserve places for fsm puoils. I have always argued that state schools should help more with 11 plus. We did lots of prep at state school. Then it fell by the wayside and this was years before sats. We did have people with a variety of backgrounds at my grammar and we were on a par with prep educated Dc. I argued for 11 plus clubs after school in poor areas. Few Dc would benefit anyway - to be fair, but one club serving several schools would have been a great investment. I was a governor at a school where 0 pupils got 11 plus most years but a few missed by 5/6/7 marks every year. These needed help and they didn’t get it as parents couldn’t afford it. Many weren’t up to coaching either. It was also interesting that when a child did pass, no parent chose the single sex, higher performing grammars. They chose the old technical high school. It’s a grammar but takes a slightly different type of child.

Or the government could focus on why some schools manage to succeed beyond all the expectations, like the non grammar schools in East London who get more Oxbridge offers than Eton.