Teachers snubbing SATs - BBC opinion

We don't have them up here but they seem like a great idea to me.
Get children used to exams, which are a good test of 'cleverness' from an early age is a good thing.
I don't buy the argument that children shouldn't be put through the stress at that age. I struggle to see how they can possibly be as stressful to cause any harm...
We require systems that can show how schools, teachers and most importantly, children, are getting on with their education over time. Exams are the best way to do this.

Again, we don't have these things in Scotland so i'm just going on opinion rather than experience.
 
Streeteh said:
I'm not a teacher but one of my parents has been all his career (he is now head teacher of a very high-achieving school) and i do work in a school. Based on his and my colleagues attitudes towards the current education system i must disagree with your claim; they all want a change, it's just not up to them.
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing whether teachers want change, but whether they will accept the right sort of change needed to really improve our system.
 
I underwent the full suite of scholastic examinations at 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. It never really bothered me as I tended to do well in them, but looking back I remember almost constantly working towards a set of tests. Education was always focussed on planning and revising for them rather than learning all that much.
 
Dolph said:
School independence, performance related management and pay, competition between schools, the return of selection and recognition that there are big differences between people...
Click to expand...

The first three would likely be welcomed with open arms amongst all the good teachers here (the vast majority). Believe it or not, performance related pay is something that i know many have wanted for a while as it will deter slackers from getting into the profession, as it stands it's easy to get away with doing little. Fortunately most in this school are honest and hard working enough to give it their all regardless of the minority that do little and get the same pay-cheque.

In fact i imagine all of those are things that would not only be accepted, but largely welcomed by the staff at this school. But as i said previously, this is a high achieving school so the majority of the staff are hard working and skilled at their job and because of that would excel in that environment. I have to admit I wouldn't be surprised if less successful schools had staff not so keen on those sorts of changes.
 
Last edited:
I remember when I sat mine in 1994. I was terrified that if I failed them that I'd never amout to anything in life. I was so stressed that during the maths exam I had to leave the room and throw up.
 
Streeteh said:
The first three would likely be welcomed with open arms amongst all the good teachers here (the vast majority). Believe it or not, performance related pay is something that i know many have wanted for a while as it will deter slackers from getting into the profession, as it stands it's easy to get away with doing little. Fortunately most in this school are honest and hard working enough to give it their all regardless of the minority that do little and get the same pay-cheque.

In fact i imagine all of those are things that would not only be accepted, but largely welcomed by the staff at this school. But as i said previously, this is a high achieving school so the majority of the staff are hard working and skilled at their job and because of that would excel in that environment. I have to admit I wouldn't be surprised if less successful schools had staff not so keen on those sorts of changes.
Click to expand...

Do you want to tell the teaching unions? Because every time any of those things are suggested they start getting all uppity and threatening to strike...
 
Dolph said:
Do you want to tell the teaching unions? Because every time any of those things are suggested they start getting all uppity and threatening to strike...
Click to expand...

Unions rarely accurately represent their entire workforce. I also made an admission that the school i work in is unlikely to be an accurate portrayal of other schools in the country in my previous post. Is it so impossible to believe that a school with a large number of hard working, skilled teachers would welcome a more competitive workplace?
 
Last edited:
IMO SATs are required. If they're 'worth nothing' then the kids might as well do them.

It'll give them stress yes, but thats a good thing as it will help them warm up to the ones in Year 9 and then GCSE and then A-level etc.

Seems a bit of a stuipid idea to scrap them imho if their first exam experience turns out to be GCSE's. Afterall, if schools are saying they are useless, and aren't really worth anything - what harm is there in making children take them and letting them know where they stand with regards to knowledge of subjects. At least this way it'll make it easier to improve their knowledge rather than later on in life.
 
Gangster said:
t'll give them stress yes, but thats a good thing as it will help them warm up to the ones in Year 9 and then GCSE and then A-level etc.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure a good justification for exam stress is the need to get used to exam stress.

Young people should be encouraged to think creatively, to play, to explore the world uninhibited by stress or worry about what the future holds. There are many years ahead for them to get worked up about exams.
 
Why not? If they don't know what the stress of exam feels like they're going to completley fall over when it comes to GCSE's. I'm glad I had SATs anyway, I think for many kids it'll give a breakdown of being told that they have GCSE exams.

The way I see it is if you have the test, its like a 'practice' so you get used to the stress of an exam.

Why provide x10 the amount of stress to people who have never known what preparation to an exam feels like?

If these don't matter, what matters if they score poor grade? At least they've had an experience of it. I feel its much more beneficial
 
Last edited:
Fubsy said:
The problem with these is they disrupt the actual teaching of a subject, no general understanding, just months of teaching kids how to pass the exam :/
Click to expand...

Never heard truer words. It's why most students (including myself) come out of the education system like a band of niave plonkers who can barely tie their own shoelaces.

Schools and teachers, through no fault of their own, live in perpetual fear of exams and how they will be measured up against them. So rather than teaching kids and give them an education in skills which will be applicable and useful in life we instead spend years training them to copy out a bog standard answer to pass. They then realise (as I did) that a large majority of the skills they have learnt are bloody useless.

I think exams do have a part in an education system but to the extent that they currently twist the system is both dissapointing and worrying.
 
No1newts said:
Never heard truer words. It's why most students (including myself) come out of the education system like a band of niave plonkers who can barely tie their own shoelaces.

[..]

I think exams do have a part in an education system but to the extent that they currently twist the system is both dissapointing and worrying.
Click to expand...
That's the way I see it.

Science lessons - for example, not that they are still included in year 6 SATs - are supposed to develop the understanding of scientific method and rigour, of making a hypothesis, gathering evidence, and analysing results - etc.

Yes there's a body of knowledge worth knowing, particularly with the technology present in the modern world - but in some ways the development of the scientific mind is more important than what topics are chosen to shove into it.

I think that this needs flexibility in what is taught.

I remember before my own year 9 SATs (now no longer in existence), I said to teacher "Sir, surely there are more than 7 colours in the rainbow? Like, infinite? Where do bluey-green and pinky-red come into it?" and he replied with "No, only 7; red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. Only 7."

He was clearly trying to make sure I would get the answer right in the exam. But it's a stupid lies-to-children simplified answer. He shouldn't have been so afraid that I'd put down the wrong thing on a piece of paper.

And what kind of a colour is indigo anyway? And violet? It should just go "..blue, purple." 6 colours. And squillions more between.
 
Last edited:
Sats are there to see whether you're dumb and should go in a low set with other dumb kids or smart in a top set with other smart kids. That's all they are there for, let kids get stressed young, they'll have a hard time growing up in the real world otherwise.
 
I get around said:
Sats are there to see whether you're dumb and should go in a low set with other dumb kids or smart in a top set with other smart kids. That's all they are there for, let kids get stressed young, they'll have a hard time growing up in the real world otherwise.
Click to expand...

More importantly its to help the less knowledgeable kids improve their skills to become up to par with the more knowledgeable kids.

With that attitude there would be no point in continuing school after year 6 would there. It'd be like - your dumb? Get out of school. Your clever? Cool stay in school.

Where would that get anyone lol
 
Dolph said:
Do you want to tell the teaching unions? Because every time any of those things are suggested they start getting all uppity and threatening to strike...
Click to expand...

On a very simple level, how would you measure a teachers' performance when it relates to their pay?

I'd have no fear, personally, as I work in a decent school (Ofsted reckon Outstanding, kids that we get in are far from brilliant) and get good results from the kids. But other departments aren't so lucky, for a variety of reasons. I wouldn't like to say they weren't performing as well as I was.

OT: I think SATs wouldn't be a problem, if like I remember in 1995, they were just a test at the end of the year.
 
platypus said:
The state system as a whole is pretty poor, not really sure it's worth getting into such a fuss over one aspect of it.
Click to expand...

Surely there's an argument that you've got to start somewhere but whether that is best served with a revision to the examination schedule or something different is up for debate.

I'm slightly conflicted about this issue, I don't think SATS are inherently a bad idea or at least some form of examination even at 11 isn't necessarily bad - giving children an introduction to the examinations that will shape their academic career doesn't seem completely stupid. However I don't like the large emphasis placed on league tables, a crude measure such as that will naturally take no account of the different starting points of various schools - for some schools just getting their pupils to pass say 4 GCSEs will be an outstanding achievement while for another school that level would be an abominal failure based on the disparity in resources, ability of pupils and engagement of the childs guardians amongst other factors.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Surely there's an argument that you've got to start somewhere but whether that is best served with a revision to the examination schedule or something different is up for debate.

I'm slightly conflicted about this issue, I don't think SATS are inherently a bad idea or at least some form of examination even at 11 isn't necessarily bad - giving children an introduction to the examinations that will shape their academic career doesn't seem completely stupid. However I don't like the large emphasis placed on league tables, a crude measure such as that will naturally take no account of the different starting points of various schools - for some schools just getting their pupils to pass say 4 GCSEs will be an outstanding achievement while for another school that level would be an abominal failure based on the disparity in resources, ability of pupils and engagement of the childs guardians amongst other factors.
Click to expand...

SATs are used as a measure for our own performance - along with other financial indicators and the GCSEs results. Whilst it doesn't make the raw GCSE results any better, our CVA score would be more comparable (and often better) than schools with higher GCSE results.
 
Y6 SATs are used to place students in appropriate sets in Y7, and also to set approximate targets at the end of GCSE's.

If SATs dont exist, what is to stop primary school teachers giving students overly high levels- making secondary school teachers targets unachievable.

If SATs dont exist, then baseline testing in Y7 will - exactly the same stress but for ALL subjects, not just Maths and English.

You cant just scrap a system without something ready to replace it.

You want teachers to be accountable for grades - you need exams to prove the grades - or some form of externally and nationally approved grading.

Assessing Pupil Progress could do this, but is only in its infancy really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom