Don't shoot me, but I like SATS (End of Key Stage National Tests - to give them their proper name!). Let me qualify slightly, I like them at KS2 and KS3, but am less convinced by KS1.
(for any non-UK readers, KS1 tests are at about aged 7, KS2 are aged 11 - the end of primary school, KS3 are aged 14, and GCSE exams are at 16, which is the end of KS4 and the end of compulsory education)
I know that's controversial at the moment, that unions (NUT & NAHT) are balloting on boycotting, and that they have support from Mums.net, so before you light the torches, and get the pitchforks out, let me set out my stall and then you can run me out of town!
Let me start by saying I HATE LEAGUE TABLES. I don't like them for primary schools, and I don't like them for secondary schools. As they stand they are grossly unfair - more so for primaries than secondaries - I think. This being because each Y6 in a small primary could be 10% of the data, and even in a big primary could be as high as 2%. For us last year, each student in Y11 was 0.55%. We achieved 49.4% scoring 5+ A*-C, which makes us officially Satisfactory.
Value Added (preferably contextualised) is much fairer. It looks at where children started, and how much progress they have made. From that point of view, with CVA of about 1008 last year, my school is Good. This however relies on the data being reliable and accurate, and for me that's where SATS at KS2 come in.
For secondary schools, our baseline data is KS2 scores. This is the measure used by DCSF, FFT, and all the other acronymic (real word?!) quangos by which our progress is measured. Whether it is 3 levels progress, 4 levels progress, or CVA the premise is the same. Without solid reliable baseline data, the rest is meaningless.
(I'm reminded here of a Dilbert cartoon about inaccurate data, but sadly I couldn't find it online).
I'm not saying that primary teachers would not give reliable Teacher Assessments. The vast majority would and do, but given they are so closely tied to league tables if you have a borderline 3/4 student, and you know that a TA of 4 would add 10% to your figures, there must at least be a temptation. This is not exclusive to primaries - I have the same concerns and misgivings about courses that at KS4 and post 16 are entirely teacher assessed.
The reason I like KS3 tests is that they are (in maths) good preparation for GCSE exams. Maths is entirely exam assessed at GCSE, and given we (like many schools) do a modular course, the first exam in is November of Y10. If a students first experience of an external exam assessment is the GCSE, then this could throw them. We have mock sats this week, and many students will get it wrong going into the exam hall. The vast majority of them will then get it right in May, but again not all. By November, and their modules, they will all be getting it right (or at least that's the plan). We could use mocks in the hall to help, but some students don't take those entirely seriously
I realise this reads a little incoherently, and it many of you will disagree with me. I just wanted to share my views, and put this side of the argument - all I hear on the news is why they are so awful!
Thoughts?
I don't like SATS but I like them more for Maths than I do for English, last year my Year 6 maths set SATS results were pretty much the same as how I assessed them, maths is much more measurable by a test than a subject like English. English SATS are a joke.
ReplyDeleteI agree - mostly!
ReplyDeleteWhere would we be in Secondary without that benchmark? It's a reasonable question, but perhaps we could trust teacher assessments instead?
And whilst I agree that an exam in Y9 helps prepare for Modules or Early Entry in Y10, I don't think SATs exams do a good preparation job. They are so distant from GCSEs in terms of style and language. We will be making our own Y9 final assessments this year, made out of old GCSE questions. It will be a pain leveling it accurately, but I think getting pupils used to that style of question earlier will be worth the effort.
OK - should have qualified I'm only talking about maths. Of teachers I work with, English hate them, Science are slightly more ambivilant (sp?). SATs are different in style to exams, but it is the exma procedure they are useful for - question style we can do in class. Thanks for all thoughts so far.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that an exam is good because it psychologically prepares a learner for another exam is crazy...apply it to any other situation where there might be stress! Without SATs teachers have to waste less time preparing for SATs, less time marking practice SATs, less time talking about SATs...
ReplyDelete