Sats boycott

[singlecoil]

Apparently a lot of teachers don't want their pupils tested for basic maths and English skills. Should we read anything into this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/10104534.stm

I did a search for sats before posting this, was surprised there doesn't seem to be a thread about it already, but sorry if it is a repost

[HundredthIdiot]

There has long been general resistance against excessing testing amongst teachers, even those whose pupils get excellent results.

There are a number of reasons for this, not all of them entirely selfless, but at a basic level greater focus on testing has not improved the quality of thinking. There are only so many teaching hours a week, and the preparations for each round of testing get in the way of less specific educational goals, as well as damaging the morale of those who don't test well.

I spoke to one of my ex-Uni lecturers a few years after graduating (I think around year 2000) and he was moaning about all the students with fantastic A-level results who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag. I can't imagine things have improved much since then.

[Targarama]

What is interesting to me is that this is an England only test, they don't have it in Scotland and Wales.

Personally I think its a waste of good teacher's time and resource. Who brought this system in? Labour? Seems another monitoring system designed to employ more public sector people.

[Four Cofffee]

Without testing how can we be sure schools and teachers are getting better, and the extra £££ billions have been well spent?

Leaving it up to teachers to assess how well the kids are doing is a bit like leaving MPs to sort out their own expenses.

Time we got rid of OFSTED for all but the worst schools, kept SATs scores in-house but performance managed bad teachers better. Perhaps SATS ought to be unannounced, but administered only to 20% of schools a year, or just to an odd class in all schools. That way we get the sharp edge required knowing they could arrive Monday morning to find the independent SATS team waiting to test, without the non-sense of kids being overly prepared just for SATS and some teachers fiddling the SATS (as we get every year).

Strikes me that the Fischer family data set is very useful in judging how well a school is doing, but that is driven by SATS.

[Tangent Police]

The significance of the tests means that their preparation comes before other learning. Hence a load of crap being shovelled into their heads.

How you still measure performance without putting too much weight on measurement is beyond me, it's paradoxical.

How about a new system where teachers performances are monitored individually, perhaps this could also go hand in hand with a pay scale.

After all, the current one is not performance related.

[mcdjl]

The reason teachers don't like them is that in the year leading upto them all the kids get taught is how to pass that exam. This is because the teachers pay gets based on it along with the schools assessment and following years budget to some extent. the kids then leave and move onto the next year where all they can do is pass the exam they sat last year and do nothing else so the new teacher has to start all over again (except with a new exam).
Teachers who don't teach the core (granted moving onto secondary schools now) subjects hate them even more as the timetables are biased towards the core sats subjects. This makes it harder for them to add value (get better marks than the kids should expect)as they have clueless kids to start with and no time in which to teach them. Since according to their sat marks the kids are all geniuses it then become hard to get them to achieve their basic target, let alone beat it.

[singlecoil]

I'm afraid it will seem to many members of the public, myself included, that many of the teachers would prefer teaching the children in their charge all about socialism and inclusive societies rather than how to multiply 9*8 or how to spell real words, as opposed to txt spk.

Trouble is, then that if the kids don't know basic stuff like this, they will fail the sats and that will put the teachers in a bad light.

That's just the way it looks, mind, I'm sure the teachers are actually acting from the highest motives and are doing this for the sake of the children.

[HundredthIdiot]

singlecoil said:

I'm afraid it will seem to many members of the public, myself included, that many of the teachers would prefer teaching the children in their charge all about socialism and inclusive societies rather than how to multiply 9*8 or how to spell real words, as opposed to txt spk.

Whilst there may be a vein of socialism running through the teaching professional, in my experience most teachers have far more pragmatic considerations, like stopping Johnny from stabbing Wayne with a compass point.

[jesta1865]

HundredthIdiot said:

singlecoil said:

I'm afraid it will seem to many members of the public, myself included, that many of the teachers would prefer teaching the children in their charge all about socialism and inclusive societies rather than how to multiply 9*8 or how to spell real words, as opposed to txt spk.

Whilst there may be a vein of socialism running through the teaching professional, in my experience most teachers have far more pragmatic considerations, like stopping Johnny from stabbing Wayne with a compass point.

very much so, the sats tests are sent out (no team arrives at the schools) and some schools get truly amazing results, and we all know they are fiddled.

the kids hate them as all they do for weeks is english, maths and science so they can pass, they learn nothing new its all the same stuff rammed down their throats. they also miss out on geography, history etc.

another issue is that ofsted and the DoE keep changing the rules and metrics that they base their review of a school on, and they do it mid term, so the same school could get an outstanding one week and a week later is satisfactory as they are judged on different rules / guidelines.

my missus is a primary teacher, and for her last 3 ofsted reports has been marked excellent, so she should not fear sats. she hates them, because the only purpose they serve is to make it easier for secondary schools to pigeon hole the kids. who then learn in year 7 all the stuff they did in 6 anyway.

as the OH says kids blossom at different ages, so the late developers will get stuck in with the genuine no hopers and struggle to climb out, i had a mate like this at secondary, he never made it out of the mid stream groups, but has gone on to found and run a very successful kitchen design and fitting business. the guy is a genius but only came into his own about 16 years old.

its all very well saying that constant testing shows how they are doing, but it doesn't, it shows how well they can regurgitate stuff for a test, and whilst that's going in, they are not learning in the real sense.

plus my OH says that if the kids feel a bit tom, but have to come in for the sats, they may not get great marks and the whole school suffers, but a rolling assessment from the teacher who deals with them day in day out is much better.

yes you can still lay the same arguments at them about self regulation and yes there are poor teachers, but the great majority are there for the kids betterment and welfare and because they want to make a difference. they are not there for the pay, the majority do masses of paperwork during the 'holidays' and they see it as a vocation, not a career and few are self serving. plus from my own experience, I can also tell you that a lot of them are very upset by the constant finger of blame pointed at them by the media and ill informed people and parents who seem to think they can abdicate any responsibility for their own kids upbringing and make the teachers do it all.

as an aside this administration are so paranoid about reviewing and controlling everything, the before and after school clubs now being looked at by ofsted. as one parent pointed out, she sends her kids to after school club as she works, they now get upset (only 6) at having to go, as they have to do work now, not play with dolly's and play dough etc.

and the last lot of ofsted inspectors included a woman who used to be an estate agent, no teaching experience or qualifications, why!?!

[ninja-lewis]

Targarama said:

What is interesting to me is that this is an England only test, they don't have it in Scotland and Wales.

Personally I think its a waste of good teacher's time and resource. Who brought this system in? Labour? Seems another monitoring system designed to employ more public sector people.

Appears to have been around since 1991, with extra tests added in 1995 and 1998 (the latter abolished last year). Presumably the decisions were made earlier than that as well.

I suppose the real measure of whether they're any use is how many independent schools voluntary conduct the tests as well. Not many I wager.

[Get Karter]

jesta1865 said:

the kids hate them as all they do for weeks is english, maths and science so they can pass, they learn nothing new its all the same stuff rammed down their throats. they also miss out on geography, history etc.

That, to me, suggests that the kids must be behind in the basics, if they need to do nothing but the basics for weeks to be ready to take some simple tests.

[poo at Paul's]

Surely their recourse is through the political system, the Unions etc. To boycott compulsory testing wihtout the parents of their pupils' consent just seems wrong to me. By all means lobby these parents and if they all agree to not sit them, so be it.

Surely the answer is to sit them and sit them under protest, then lobby the SOS that the idea is wrong.
I've heard various arguments as to the merits or not of SATs, some contradict each other it seems.
I heard a deputy head saying it was crazy to put kids under so much stress, that they get exams at the end of each year for 8 years and it was causing mental illness issues. I then heard a Head from another school saying it is crazy to put all this weight on kids after a culmination of 8 years worth of teaching, in one test. I know these may be at different periods, ie tests for 8 years running by the time you leave shcool, but it sort of seems to me you either like regular testing, or you dont, (ie one every 8 years!)If the issue is the "age" of the pupils being tested, so be it, but that is rarely cited.

Maybe they just dont want any testing at all and leave the measurement down to them. Whilst this may work in some schools, in others it would easily be absused. Having had billions pumped into Education, it is clear the taxpayer would expect some accurate measure of the sucess of the operation, particularly as many young people seem to have lots of qualifications and very little "gump".

If it were my kid expecting to sit the tests and the Head cancelled them without notice or discussion with parents, I'd be a bit miffed I think. However if they were sat "under protest" I'd possibly have a more receptive attitude to the action .

Edited by poo at Paul's on Monday 10th May 16:13

[Tangent Police]

The whole problem is with outcome based learning and children who tick boxes with lots of outcomes.

Rather than KS2 SATS being a hi-score of the school (which it is) it would be better that there is a measure of the student and means of distinguishing him from his peers by appropriate testing. ie:- Norm referenced, rather than criterion referenced.

However, the education system doesn't like norm referencing, as it interferes with their equality bullst.

Fing is, this is also the problem with KS3 stats and GCSE's. Everyone is concerned with Hi-Scores, particularly that of the leage tables and developing ever more efficent ways to instill the recall ability in the children.

The bottom line is that in order to teach kids the best, you need to be able to distinguish them, in order to take them on for a post school post, you also need to be able to distinguish them.

This is another one of the glitches with outcome based learning hysteria.

However, the alternative is so un-PC, they couldn't possibly contemplate it.

I'd like to see what the communists at the NUT have to say with regards to how they propose to get rid of them.

Focussing too much time on tests is a problem, but discrimination is required (sadly). I don't think the majority of teachers have much of an idea about the problem, as it has been done this way for most of their careers.

The only proposal which could make any sense is to have some sort of continual formative assessment which would create the need for ever more specified curricula. They wouldn't like this either.

A return to norm referencing is what's needed, for staff and the bigger picture.

Again, it's workshy communists at the NUT rattling the cages of the easily led. fking idiots should lose their jobs.

[jesta1865]

Get Karter said:

jesta1865 said:

the kids hate them as all they do for weeks is english, maths and science so they can pass, they learn nothing new its all the same stuff rammed down their throats. they also miss out on geography, history etc.

That, to me, suggests that the kids must be behind in the basics, if they need to do nothing but the basics for weeks to be ready to take some simple tests.

i didn't say it was the basics i said it was the same stuff, just the same way a gymnast will practice and practice so the muscle memory develops, they go over the same stuff again and again. they are not that simple for kids of that age.

its rammed down their throats to get them to pass the sats not to educate them.

[mcdjl]

Get Karter said:

jesta1865 said:

the kids hate them as all they do for weeks is english, maths and science so they can pass, they learn nothing new its all the same stuff rammed down their throats. they also miss out on geography, history etc.

That, to me, suggests that the kids must be behind in the basics, if they need to do nothing but the basics for weeks to be ready to take some simple tests.

Define behind...other than not upto the same level as another kid of the same age.
The issue is that kids have the attention span of 15minutes, in order to pass these tests they have to spend ages 'learning' it to make sure they remember enough to pass. As soon as 1 teacher does this and gets good marks, the others need to do the same to not be behind. This is why testing is needed: to see where they are, but also why this form of very formulaic testing is also very bad. Even 10 years back the teachers could predict what basic question (ie what we would have to do) would be on the exam papers (right upto GCSE) and spent time going over it towards the end of the year...

[jesta1865]

Tangent Police said:

The bottom line is that in order to teach kids the best, you need to be able to distinguish them, in order to take them on for a post school post, you also need to be able to distinguish them.

I'd like to see what the communists at the NUT have to say with regards to how they propose to get rid of them.

Focussing too much time on tests is a problem, but discrimination is required (sadly). I don't think the majority of teachers have much of an idea about the problem, as it has been done this way for most of their careers.

The only proposal which could make any sense is to have some sort of continual formative assessment which would create the need for ever more specified curricula. They wouldn't like this either.

A return to norm referencing is what's needed, for staff and the bigger picture.

Again, it's workshy communists at the NUT rattling the cages of the easily led. fking idiots should lose their jobs.

you see this is the problem, the continual assessment is already there anyway, the teachers know that kids have to be streamed, and asses them everyday in their heads and on paper over the weeks. so its already done, then you have the sats which is a second form of grading, which was brought in to tackle the problem of 'bad' teachers and poor assessments, problem is it didn't wheedle out many poor teachers and it has now been made so important by the gubbermint weeks of learning are lost as they prepare for the sats, some schools start at xmas.

oh and i am no great lover of the unions, but remember a union can call for all sorts of action etc, but if its members won't support it, it will lose credibility. my OH would not support the call for industrial action last year for more money, not when people were losing their jobs. however she supports this as she effectively loses 2 months schooling for the kids and ends up with 2 sets of paperwork to do saying the same thing.

[Yeast Lord]

Why don't they pronounce it like the Americans do?

[Asterix]

I was chatting to the missus about this. She's Indian and the Indian education system is pure rote learning - all they do is tell you the answers and drum it in to you - there's no explanation, no problem solving, no working stuff out for yourself.

Often, they won't even know what the question is about, but they will recognise it and insert answer no: 18627 etc...

This is what excessive testing does - kids get taught how to pass exams not how to work stuff out.

[singlecoil]

Does anyone have some sample questionns from a SATS test, or a link to where some could be viewed, I'd be very interested to see what it is that is causing so much difficulty

[bonsai]

Asterix said:

I was chatting to the missus about this. She's Indian and the Indian education system is pure rote learning - all they do is tell you the answers and drum it in to you - there's no explanation, no problem solving, no working stuff out for yourself.

Seems perfectly designed to prepare them for a lifetime of helpdesk work.