This year's KS2 SATs are looming and if the NUT get their way it could be their last year! However the NAS/UWT are demanding they remain and are threatening action if they are abolished. What a mess. It seems that my posting from 15th April is becoming more relevant; our representatives are now conspiring to create conflicting bad news stories.Most teachers seem to have issues with the league tables and the way they are used as an unsubtle measuring device and as far as I'm concerned they remain a poor way to judge a school. League tables are certainly used by interested parents when they are choosing schools, but without an understanding of Contextual Value Added data, or of actual visits to see a school in action, they act principally as a measure of an individual school's raw material. I have visited some schools high on league tables where I wouldn't want to send my children and vice-versa some fabulous places, where children are provided with excellent teaching in a wonderful environment, despite lingering in the lower reaches of a table.
When asked by non-teachers about choosing a school I always say the key is deciding whether a school will help YOUR child to achieve 100% of their potential, not do they get 100% level 4+ for all their children.
Some people feel that opposition to league tables is down to a fear of accountability, a particular proponent of this view is Chris Woodhead (the former Head of Ofsted). In his "Answer the Question" column in the Sunday Times he never fails to give his views to parents who are ostensibly asking for advice. In this week's column he was asked for his views on the potential boycott, to which he replied "The tests expose failing schools. That is why the teacher unions have always hated them." He also felt that "Parents need it [League Tables] if they are to exercise a choice about the school they want their children to attend." I have no doubt that weak teachers, poor managers and over doctrinal union activists may feel like this but the majority of hard working, high quality educators dislike them for several very sound reasons.
It is clear that the curriculum has narrowed over the years as teachers feel pressured to push their school up the local table. It certainly causes some children undue pressure, as witness the tears and fears I have seen some conscientious pupils go through. The final year at primary school has become a rather bizarre time where so much seems focused on '5 days in May.' This in itself potentially causes further problems as the release of the pressure valve in the final half term and the shock of moving to secondary school in September seems to reinforce a plateauing of children's true levels. High school teachers therefore feel they cannot rely on the SATs data, so who does it serve and how do the tests help?
There is no doubt the tables are used by “middle-class parents with sharp elbows”, to quote David Cameron when discussing his views on faith schools and the lengths parents will go to to get their children into 'good schools.' He felt unable to criticise parents for exercising choice; "I think it’s good for parents who want the best for their kids. I don’t blame anyone who tries to get their children into a good school." Who can disagree, but are league tables the right way to form an opinion, and is it acceptable to rush for baptism, rediscover dormant faith or manipulate possible entry through multiple property ownership? Choice has become a political tennis ball and is something of a myth which panders to the sharp elbowed. How can everyone have choice? All children can't attend the 'best school' in an area, so those places will continue to be monopolised by the families fortunate enough to be able to 'choose.' The real debate should be how do we ensure choice isn't needed because your local school will be good enough.
Having said all of this however I do see some value in the tests. Certainly testing always forms a crucial part of understanding children's progress and planning for their future learning. Further to this I also see value in having this externally verified by independent and well trained examiners and that this evidence can feed into the data available to help build up a picture of a school's progress. I saw some of this process when I was a marker for the 2007 KS2 Literacy SATs (being awarded Grade A status - thanks for asking), however this was in the days of EdExcel and prior to last year's disaster with ETS.
For the last couple of years I have also worked with groups of children at a local school delivering Booster Classes, which is where I was this morning. I do have some reservations about this process and the ability for the sessions to contribute to the issues of pressure and curriculum narrowing; however when I talk to the children I try to let them know the benefits of "facing the SATs." I genuinely believe that some of the processes are useful; for example it is a life skill to deal with pressure, to meet a deadline, to perform well on a given day or to complete tasks with focus and sustained concentration. The tests do provide a real-life opportunity to have some of these experiences. Surely, however, this is not sufficient reason to continue with them in their current format.
Year 6 teachers have reservations about boosting, revising and coaching, but they have to balance these against the demands of supporting their pupils and promoting their school. Speaking to colleagues in Lincolnshire and Leeds over the last two days has reinforced this and no doubt it forms the basis of numerous staff room conversations as we turn into the home straight. In the end my aim with these booster sessions is to help the children to face up to the challenges of the testing period to the best of their ability and whilst the tests remain I am prepared to continue being involved with this work.
Click here to see the top 50 primary schools in England (Notice anything? The sharp elbowed or eyed amongst you might! A whole other, and terribly contentious, debate could follow!)
Why not give schools (and publish) the contextual value added scores for SATs but let that be the end of it. No-one knows which individual kid got what. That way there's no pressure on kids, schools can't hunt down and point fingers -- simply put, if a school is failing everyone will have to work together to up their game rather than focusing on the borderline kids or witch-hunting a particular teacher. Job done.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with tests (as with performance related pay) is that they are fine if implemented from an educational stndpoint. However, the Sats and league tables were part of a central government obsession with targets and the ideology of targetting and little to do with actually raising educational standards.
ReplyDeleteAs with all targets, the league tables are a blunt instrument, and their flaw is that they were constructed without subtlety or complexity, probably by people whose understanding of the subtleties and complexities of the education process are outdated (i.e. the Leavisite obsessions with literature at KS4)or scant at best.
cptcha "dermeat"