Y1 pupil being timed what seems constantly

[rbmilliner]

Can anyone in education tell me if this is right. My Y1 DD's school seems to be constantly timing them.
Today for example DD was upset at bedtime tonight because she had missed out on forest school today as she had to resit a timed test for number bonds.
On picking this apart it turns out that she didn't complete a number bonds test in 3 minutes and had to redo it and was clearly upset at being singled out, along with another 3 children, saying she just needed to think about some of the answers.
She was put back a level in reading because she couldn't read at 60 words per minute and apparently wasn't reading fluently enough. All parents then received a blanket letter via see saw to time kids when listening to them read to try and improve on fluency. I tried this once but stopped as she wasn't reading but simply saying what she thought should be there is a rush to finish and stressing her out.
She's clearly upset and I really concerned about what this is doing to her self esteem. The school has a reputation for being very academic, wanting to get results but is constantly timing and putting children of this age under so much pressure the way it's done in all schools?

This would destroy my possibly dyslexic 6 year old. She struggles with reading anyway and will be sent for assessment as soon as she is 7, so to have timed reading would just kick the small amount of confidence that she does have away. She probably reads 10-20 words a minute (I have never timed her).

I would move my child from a school like this. This is about results and not well-rounded, happy, resilient children.

To be clear following my previous post, schools should not be timing all reading nor should parents be timing it at home. But there should be, on occassion, fluency checks to see how fluent a child is becoming, whether this is on track and so whether or not they need any additional help.

My yr1 child hates timers and would fall apart! We've used them in the past to try to make things fun, like a ten minute tidy up, or getting dressed, as my older child likes that sort of thing.

I've never heard of this approach and would be asking them not to time my child.

I'd speak to the teacher but in all honesty would start looking at other schools, this sounds awful.

I would be looking at other schools. I wouldn't be happy with timed reading. I want my children to love reading, I never want it to be a chore.
I would be really cross about my child missing forest school to repeat a test. I do make mine practice their number bonds and times tables after school every day when younger as I see the benefit of instant recall but they shouldn't be missing the fun parts of school, that will just feel like a punishment to a child.

Maybe, it depends what you mean by 'should'. If this is a new expectation, then perhaps the teacher 'should' find a way to make it work without harming the children. They could administer the test in an unobtrusive way, so that the child would feel that they were reading normally and would be unaware of the timing.

I teach Y1 and would not do this to my pupils, it sounds nuts. Whatever happened to fostering a love of reading?!

"should" as in it's necessary and beneficial for the children. It will lead to better and more specific support (both at school and, hopefully, at home) which will enable the less fluent children to, over time, gain true fluency and not be left behind by their peers or grow to become teenagers / adults who suffer with lower levels of literacy.

Timing all reading is ridiculous and it's promoting the wrong thing. Fluency is both speed and accuracy so a child displaying one without the other is not fluent. It's important for children to know and understand this as this would also avoid the rush guessing behaviour described in this thread.

I get that children should read fluently, but being timed for reading is ridiculous and puts pressure on them. In year 1 this is not needed.

Being timed for all reading is ridiculous, yes, and is not needed at any level.

Checking the fluency of children and then improving it is absolutely not ridiculous and is very needed in Y1. Fluency doesn't just happen: it's taught, specifically in Reception, KS1 and, when needed, LKS2.

Yes, agreed. Very important for dc to be fluent readers, which does not require pressure and being timed.

It's an absolute disgrace to do this to a child. I'd be complaining to Governors and considering changing schools. Your DD has every right to a full and balanced curriculum. It just shows the school is more concerned with data than the children's wellbeing

Testing fluency requires timing as fluency is a measure of both speed and accuracy together. This has been done effectively for years with no issue. This particular school has made an error here by introducing general timing when reading and asking parents to do this at home.

However, suggesting that the act of timing is something that shouldn't happen is not correct. Equally, pressure is not necessarily a negative thing, depending on many factors contributing to it.

This is discriminatory towards students with Sen and slow processing, difficulty with rote learning. Not difficult to work out why there is such a rise in poor mental health in children when they’re subjected to this and the impact on self esteem etc at such a young age. I’d be seriously considering another school if you can

I teach year 2 and lead KS1 and we don't do anything like this at my school in year 1 or year 2. I would definitely speak to the class teacher.

My thoughts are you can listen to a dc read and hear if they are fluent readers. They do not need to be timed for this. Growing up, this is how it was done at my school. I do not think my dc were ever timed, at least they never said they were. The school never mentioned this. They are both GDS in reading. I feel dc being timed would put pressure, turn them off for reading. Far better to help them find a love for reading.

Most children wouldn't necessarily be aware of it: that's one of the areas where this school has gone wrong. However, there are specific fluency measures for specific ages ( x number of words per minute with y% level of accuracy in an text of age-appropriate difficulty). This requires that the teacher is measuring specifically how much time the child has been reading or reading for a set time and measuring the number of words.

It's a common misconception that you can effectively judge fluency simply by listening to the child. That was the common practice for a while but is also the reason why you end up with older children who struggle with reading because they aren't actually fluent but have learnt to mask it when reading the simpler KS1 texts.

Can you move schools? It doesn't seem like an environment that will suit your child and no matter how much you complain, they won't change policies especially if they're very academically focused.

DD's school was similar in tactics, but the kids were never punished or aware of it so it was okish and fairly balanced.

At 5 your child is already being made to feel not good enough and missing out on important experiences. That is not ok.

I'm not exactly understanding why this is so desirable a target - isn't it just making sounds without engaging comprehension, like sightreading music - you simply don't have to understand or recall any of it, your body just makes the appropriate sounds?

As soon as I learned to do it, I started scanning for useful information and ignoring the majority of the words, which may very well be a useful skill (certainly is when you have an entire statute to go through to find one particular eventuality) and meant my stammer, as it did when singing, disappeared briefly, but it's not the same as understanding the text, is it?

The cynic in me is convinced it's because of the sats. There's a whole bunch of kids that have the ability to score higher if they were quicker (either in reading or mental maths) hence the focus on speed.

And you're right, that is a skill that is actually taught, we call it skim reading and it is very useful for children, but comprehension needs to be at a very good level to give good results.

Top two tables?? This school just sounds worse!! Table grouping by ability is pretty old fashioned now and doesn't go with current thinking about mixed ability, no ceiling on learning etc.

I'd seriously be considering this school OP. If they do this to Year 1s, I'd hate to think what kind of state the Year 6s are in going into next week and their SATs.

Not all schools are like this and they still get good academic results!

Never heard of this and can't see a need. My DD is about to sit year 2 SATs and they're not timed ( I asked as she has Sen so would probably need extra time if they were). The school do do timed tests in junior's but if they run out of time they just don't finish.

Ruth Miskin is one of the government's luvvies- hideous and wrong as it is to test young learners in this way, I wouldn't be surprised if it became compulsory across other phonics schemes (which now have to be on the government's special list) and also to creep into other areas of the curriculum. The year 4 times tables test is another way to scare children off timed tests for life and even at 9 it reduces the most confident, quick processors into quivering wrecks.
Write to your MP but also request a meeting with class teacher next week.

That's ridiculous

I have to test year 2 pupils on times tables and reading common exception words.

The times tables have to be instant and correct to pass the test. If they get any incorrect or hesitate for too long, they don't pass. But all that means is I will revisit the same set of times tables next time, and again and again until they are secure in their knowledge. I don't tell them how well they did or didn't do and they certainly don't get punished or miss out on anything over it.

Same with the common exception words. I give them maybe 5 seconds to read and process the word, then move on to the next.