So, who can come and explain Yr2 SATS to me?

[HuwEdwards]

DD has done them, this much I know. But I have lots of questions...

Will we get results?
If so when?
Will I understand the results when I get them?
Does this affect which class/streaming in KS2 (am pretty sure it must otherwise what's the point)

Thankyou.

They seem to be small-ish tests to back up teacher assessment - at KS1 I have to say my two hardly knew they were taking them as school kept them very low key.

'Results' were in end of year report - but in that the emphasis was on assessment throughout year, not on tests.

Parents get more worked up about them. LOL at Enid's competitive mum - I had something similar with DD who got awful result in one subject. Chatting with other mums and conversation turned to which child had the crap result in writing - was assumed to be the child with special needs (wtf?!) when it was in fact my own dd. DD got damned good mark for KS2 SATS, btw.

"you just end up labelling the summer children as 'less able' and that label goes with them for the rest of their school career. "

Blimey - is that true?

I see it the other way, my dd2 will be 7 at the end of August. If she does well, it seems especially good cos she's young. If she doesn't do so well, we can think, well, she's only 6, of course she's not as mature as the children who are nearly a year older.

you can't lose with an August child.

we were told in January at a parents evening what the expected SATS results would be for ds1. He is sitting them this week I think but the school nor he have said anything to him and he is still getting the normal homework. He has had some extractes of test papers home at weekends as part of extra homework and I know one was a level 3 one but thats it.

I wait to be told!

The dcs are at a SATS-free school, but there are still some tests done, but mainly to check against the teacher's assessment as to whether the pupils have really understood a particular topic.

When faced with such a test for the first time ds1 seemed rather confused. He said that he knew he hadn't come first in maths as pupil X had finsished first. All became clear when I saw the maths paper - first 25 answers correct, next 25 answers - completely random! Clearly the object of the exercise was lost on him. I'd pity any school who ended up being assessed on the basis of tests being taken by 6 and 7 yos. His class teacher just laughed at the result and decided that he was fine. But then the results don't appear on any league table.

blu - I think it is true to some extent, as their expected KS2 results are extrapolated from the KS1 results. So if you get a summer boy (sorry for generalisations, I have a summer boy who is very bright, but is never going to match a bright September girl in writing atm) achieving, say 2b in writing, they will be seen as 'middle of the road' when in fact they could be doing FANTASTICALLY well to be achieving a 2b at age 6. But a September born girl (again sorry) could be underachieving with a 2b. So the result is meaningless, but nevertheless goes on their record, and further conclusions are drawn from it.

And if you had a child who got, say, a 2c, I could see a teacher (perhaps not a good teacher) looking at their record, and cataloguing them as 'lower half of the class, needs support to bring up to average' rather than 'young child, would have been spot on average or higher if they were average age'. And so expectations of the child are affected negatively.

Fennel - I do know exactly what you mean about August babies - dd is August, ds1 is June, ds2 is May, and it is quite comforting that if they are behind in something that they are 'young in the year' - less expectation than if they were old for the year. And in dd's case it is a blessing as she is doing so well, she needs the challenge of the older children!

oh, well - DS is a mid-July boy, with er...non-neat handwriting, and a complete inability to interpret the questions sensibly.

So - doomed.

Oh well!

I think his verbal explanations will convince any half-awake teacher that he might be worth persisting with.

I saw some SATs results figures once showing what percentage of children of each gender and age nationally got what level one year - and between 5% and 10% of the August-born boys (it varied by subject, with writing being the lowest) got Level 3s, compared with some whopping statistic of September born children. I only clocked the August ones, as my boys are both August too.

Stands to reason, though, doesn't it? There is a girl in DS2's class who is 364 days older than DS2. Hardly surprising her writing is neater.

Purely anecdotal (there's always one) my two August-born children both do very well (DS1 got 3s and 5s for KS1 and KS2). My October-born child is currently doing KS2 SATs and will struggle, especially in literacy.

Well, my ds is definitely doomed. He came home today sayingt hat he had done a really hard paper and he had got right to the end, and the last question was the hardest - it was what's half of 500? I asked him what he put - "230, of course" he said.

Don't suppose his handwriting's so bad they'll think it's 250........!

Yes, DS proudly announced that he had done very well in the spelling as he had got 'chair' right. c-h-e-r.
And boxes - box's, apparantly.

Doomed.

a boy who can apostrophise will always have a place in life

he was patently considering the box's sides

OK, I think what we all have to remember is where SATS come from. I started school in 1966, aged 4. It was entirely possible to leave school at 16 having, apart from the divisive 11+, NEVER BEEN TESTED in any way, shape or form. Schools could and DID in the case of my brother's secondary modern, send home glowing reports in years 7-10, then suddenly, in yr 11, what COULD have gone wrong? DB was 'fooling around', 'not concentrating', 'is disappointing'- all to account for the ONE CSE grade 4 he got. Transpires EVERY parent there got more or less the same report. SATS were introduced, imho, to highlight problems in a) general teaching (why HAS this entire class not improved one iota in 'x' years?) and b) the child ('ah, we have a documentable problem here, bring on the SEN'). I would FAR rather find out, via 'formal' testing that my DS is struggling at 7, not 16, thanks.

I personally have every faith in our DCs teachers. I can fully understand why SATS can cause such grief, (though shouldn't we be impressed that our 7 year olds, or 6 in my case, even KNOW there's a test on? MY DS2 didn't!). OK, KS1 SATS need a broader brush in that our DSs write at a glacial pace. But I so believe in the need for KS2 SATS.

See, the trouble is with NOT 'teaching to the test', whilst excellent in the hands of a clever and inspirational teacher, can lead to 'teaching to nothing in particular'.

PS DS1 got 2s in all his KS1 SATS except reading where he did a tad better, DS2 has just sat his and will probably get 2Cs at best! So I don't write as a 'look how well MY DSs can do and I want exams to prove it!' mummy!

Is it just state schools that do SATS or do private schools do them too? Also would a private school outside the UK following a UK curriculum be encouraged to take them as well do you think?

Private schools do them too.

My nephew has been doing them and SIL is making him revise eery night for his important exams. Poor kid is stressed.

My ds will do Yr 2 SATS next year - I hope he will have no idea what is going on, I will certainly not talk about them at all.

Total admiration for Enid who did not look at results. Respect Enid

yes, Twiglett, you have it exactly.

But what about a boy who can spell Cher before chair?

miljee, I think that's a very valid point.

Have just started a thread about this - because I do wonder, if you're in favour of scrapping the SATS - do you not want any formal testing at all until when? Not until GCSE's?

SATs are optional for private schools, but if they want to do well in the league tables then they have to do them. The dcs school doesn't do them and therefore don't appear in the league tables.

I agree with miljee about having some form of objective assessement, our eldest DC at school in the very early days of sats brought home reports saying doing well, good at this, that and the other but on arriving at secondary school was in near to bottom sets for everything so she had to have lots of help. Most children from that primary school were in the lower sets (except funnily enough the children whose mothers were primary school teachers - any link)

The benefit of the sats seemed to peak about four or five years ago before it all became a big industry