Boycotting SATS

[MumofChimp]

We’re taking our 11 year old on holiday during SATS week, as that break is more valuable to him than sitting in a classroom completing tests that say nothing about him and are just used to rank schools. Much of his Y6 curriculum has been wasted, doing practice tests that he’s found tedious. He’s an anxious boy who really struggled emotionally with the pressure of the Kent Test and this is a step too far for him. I always said that, if we had the opportunity, we’d boycott and - yes! - we have the opportunity. Anyway, the point of this post is, is anyone else boycotting and how are you going about informing the school? I’m not interested in counter-arguments; I’m an ex-secondary teacher and I know that the results are of little use for progression.

@Jimmyspiano from my experience they see potential and want to make sure the child does as best they can. Going into secondary DS was given straight 6 predictions. He came out with 8 7+. They pushed him as best they could.
So average SATS won't hold him back, in fact he'll surprise them.
Some of his friends didn't get the best mocks at GCSE, were told they had so much potential, revised their hearts out and now thinking of Oxbridge.

Bit doesn't this back up the point that there is no advantage for an individual but merely the school itself.

I know nothing about SATS tests or you or your son but the message you seem to be giving him is if you want to do something which is not allowed (taking a child on holiday in term time) is OK if it's a rule that you disagree with.
By extension how far would go with that line of thought, if your son wanted something belonging to another pupil is it OK for him to take it if you think it would be best for him?
Your attitude is typical of I know best parents and of teachers in general who in my experience always seem to know what's best for everyone.

Sometimes repeated exposure to the thing you fear can make anxiety worse.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/all-about-cognitive-and-behavior-therapy/202110/common-myths-about-exposure-therapy-for

It's not just a case of doing it and finding that it was ok after all.

Grammar school is one test after another.
All this makes no sense.

@Noicant This is also interesting on exposure therapy and how apparent successes in ET then lead to bad practice and advice in terms of school based anxiety.

https://naomicfisher.substack.com/p/what-do-we-do-about-school-refusal

You aren't doing him any favours. Are you going to book a holiday for his GCSEs too? What about Driving Tests, sports assessment, job interviews. You are supposed to teach him to cope and get through life, not book a holiday to avoid the difficult bits. I have a dc doing A Levels now, who gets extremely frighteningly anxious during exam time, but is learning coping strategies.

All of those examples are of some benefit to the individual taking the test.

SATS are of no benefit to children.

Should we be teaching children that they should only do things that are a benefit to them? Genuine question, I don’t have the answer!

chickenpieandchips, thank you so much for your reply. I really appreciate it. Thank you for your reassurance. My older two did not take the year 6 SATs beause one has learning difficulties that meant that he was disallowed and the other was in year 6 in 2020. I am new to this situation.

I think they are of benefit to the child.

And in any event - my child’s school has nurtured her love of learning, her knowledge and her development for years. They’ve supported her through difficulties and given her every opportunity they could to shine. Why wouldn’t I want the school to reap the benefit of all their hard work?

That’s what I mean I guess. Our primary school is brilliant, and if my child taking SATS is a benefit to them (it won’t be to her, as she’s going to an independent secondary on an academic scholarship) then I’m happy for her to do them.

When an entire cohort miss the test, everyone is in the same boat so no child is prioritised over the others. When the majority of children have data to be officially measured from and a small number don't, those children are seen as a lower priority.

Any tests that secondary schools do, other than GCSEs, are internal and do not affect anything with regards to progress measures or how the school is judged.

The point is that they have to learn to cope with tests. Whether or not we think SATs are necessary is irrelevant. Perhaps the op should ask the senior school her dc is moving up to what their opinion is on exams vs weeks by the pool.

No, it shows that the results of the exams have a knock on impact on the child that will follow them, affecting things, all the way up to GCSEs.

What does your child think?

Mine knows my feelings on SATs. She also wants to do her best in them because she's done the hard work all year.

Mine would be really annoyed if she missed doing them with her friends then had to do them the following week on her own while the rest of them had their post SATS treat week!

How so?

Internal tests and progress measures don't really mean anything except to the school though.

Kids without SATS results are not treated as a lower priority . This is nonsense. Where is evidence to back this up. You have none because it simply is not true.

Ok OPs attitude towards her primary school still smells bad to me. And her son as others have said will miss out on the camaraderie when he gets back.

I would be for boycotting sats as I was in times of old but boycotting while laid on a Beach isn't really a boycott.

SATs week is probably easier than the build up to them. Breakfast club is usually put on for them, extra treats in the afternoon.

I can assure you, as someone who has worked as a data and assessment lead and has supported academy trusts with this, it absolutely is true. It affects setting, curriculum opportunities, staff and resource allocation, levels of support, levels of challenge, etc. Just because you don't want it to be true, doesn't mean it isn't.

You can even see evidence of this in TV documentaries about schools. There was one not too long back where the secondary managed to secure money to fund a tutoring/mentoring programme for a small number of students. They debated who to focus on and the decision was made through data. Their lowest progress measure scores at GCSE had been white working class boys so they identied which white working class boys were most off track, based on KS2 results, and gave them the tutoring and mentoring.

So you have no link to any evidence other than anecdotal. Any teacher can identify underperformed kids from their internal tests and data collections and therefore SATS are not necessarily needed.

Indeed many independent schools do not do SATS and when pupils transition to a secondary school they aren't held back as a result.

My below average DDs both got a sense of achievement from sitting SATs, and were proud to have done them. They also felt they 'deserved' all the post sats treats. Exam week was special too with bacon baps, extra breaktimes etc.
DD2 never knew her results (average below 100) but knew we were proud of her.

There have been no studies into GCSE attainment for incoming pupils with and without SAT data. In fact, no GCSE progress data is published (or even collected) for pupils without SAT data. As such, the detached quantitative evidence you're after cannot exist because the data for it is deliberately not collected. Anecdotal evidence is the only evidence that exists.
It's also why you have no non-anecdotal evidence for statements like:
many independent schools do not do SATS and when pupils transition to a secondary school they aren't held back as a result.
because no data on the progress of these pupils to GCSE is ever collected.

You are misunderstanding me. This isn't about whether teachers can identify whether or not pupils are underperforming. They certainly can do this in relation to how they believe that pupil should perform. It's about what, if anything, the secondary does in response to this underperforming.

One of the main ways that secondaries are held to account is by their progress 8 measure (this tracks the children from Y6 to Y11 and identifies whether they have made the expected level of progress, less than they should have or more than they should have). School leaders are incredibly mindful of this and factor it in to their decision making process, particularly when resources are limited.

To work through a practical example, if there are three children who are all currently on track for a 4 or a 5 in maths and the school has the ability to offer one of them additional support through mentoring, they will use KS2 data and progress 8 to decide which one gets it. For example:
If Pupil A is getting a 4 or 5 but only needs to get a 3 to hit a neutral progress 8 score, they are already 'overperforming' and won't be selected.
If Pupil B is getting a 4 or 5 and their target for a neutral progress 8 score is a 4 or 5, they will be selected unless...
Pupil C is getting a 4 or 5 but should be getting a 6, based on their KS2 results. In that case, Pupil C will be selected over Pupil B and Pupil A.

All three pupils would have benefitted from the mentoring but Pupil C gets it because, data-wise, they are a higher priority and it's a limited resource. Pupil C, as a result of the mentoring, manages to get that higher grade at GCSE.

We can add in Pupil D, who has no KS2 data and so will never contribute a progress 8 score (negative, neutral or positive) to the school's total. Pupils C, B and A would all get the mentoring before Pupil D because their progress affects the secondary school and Pupil D's doesn't. He is, statistically, irrelevant.