Advice re: sats for Yr6

bylromarha

daisiegg wrote: »

We do a lot of moderation with our local primaries, actually (which I know is unusual, but it is something a colleague of mine has spearheaded and is very passionate about). And this moderation has found that in a lot of cases, our interpretation of what, say, a 5c looks like can be very different to a primary school's interpretation. Added to the fact that the tasks are just very different at secondary school (depressing as it is, we have to think about preparing them for GCSE style tasks right from y7 )

If you agree that SATs are pointless then I think we actually don't disagree about anything.

I don't really understand your point about repeating learning they have already done in y6. I don't see how we do that? We also don't devalue their hard work in y6? We just don't pay much attention to what they got in the SATs test. That is a different thing.

Apologies. It was 11:30, just finished work, came on here for a wind down before bed and read "we completely ignore the SATs level" for " we completely ignore the teacher assessments".

Temper that with the fact I've been on 3 courses mixed primary/secondary teachers where the secondary teachers are talking about how inflated the teacher levels the kids come up with are, and how they have to re test again at the start of the year as the primary judgements are so unreliable.

One of our local secondaries ( a good one) reteach majority year 6 curriculum in year 7 to make sure all the kids have got it - both english and maths. Some of the brighter kids who've moved on come back to visit and say how easy they're finding the work as they did it all with us and know what to do. This school choose not to moderate with us.

bylromarha

mrcow wrote: »

But what's the point of me trying to moderate a primary scores when I can get my own levels with 2 hours of tests and 10 hours of marking? And then I know it's then a level score because I did it myself. My level 5 looks a lot different to some primary level 5s.

But that proves my point...! SOME primary level 5s are pointless, therefore we'll start from scratch and reassess as we know better than the primary schools who have had these kids all day, 5 days a week and can see how their core skills are applied in all manner of subjects.

I presume you're maths as that must be the only thing where a 2 hour test will give you everything you need to know?

mrcow

bylromarha wrote: »

But that proves my point...! SOME primary level 5s are pointless, therefore we'll start from scratch and reassess as we know better than the primary schools who have had these kids all day, 5 days a week and can see how their core skills are applied in all manner of subjects.

I presume you're maths as that must be the only thing where a 2 hour test will give you everything you need to know?

Science - and a two hour test will give me a very good starting point. Including basic maths and literacy abilities. I'll adjust the targets for year 8 though based on my year 7 obs and experience. We could base it on a guide from KS2 results but there's no point when we can do it ouselves and it's moderated properly.

As I said though, even my GCSE and AS & A2 targets are taken as a guideline. No child's learning is linear. We don't all fit into those neat little boxes. No one should be boxed in by a target......especially one that has been set by one or two tests sat on some random day in May when you were 10.

securityguy

snozberry wrote: »

Bad advice as the child in question will have to do them when he returns to school.

Only within five days, and then only if they have not had access to the Internet or other people who have taken the test.

Read the KS2 SAT Administrator Guide, pages 11 and 12.

balletshoes

bylromarha wrote: »

But that proves my point...! SOME primary level 5s are pointless, therefore we'll start from scratch and reassess as we know better than the primary schools who have had these kids all day, 5 days a week and can see how their core skills are applied in all manner of subjects.

I presume you're maths as that must be the only thing where a 2 hour test will give you everything you need to know?

but you said it yourself - some primary level 5s are pointless. Your year 6 kids could have been levelled completely correctly, but what if the other feeder primary schools haven't? Isn't it then logical for the secondary school to test all the kids when they enter year 7, to ensure the children are set as fairly as possible?

bylromarha

mrcow wrote: »

Science - and a two hour test will give me a very good starting point. Including basic maths and literacy abilities. I'll adjust the targets for year 8 though based on my year 7 obs and experience. We could base it on a guide from KS2 results but there's no point when we can do it ouselves and it's moderated properly.

By using terms like "it's moderated properly", it implies it wasn't moderated properly previously. We have termly moderation meetings across our cluster of 6 primary schools to make sure we all agree what the levels look like in different areas and subjects.

I also think that the summer plays a part for the majority of these kids - they know it in July, but just forget it when asked in September/October. They remember their previous learning in lesson 1 or 2, but by that point the teacher has planned a scheme on this topic as the kids don't know it, as the test said so.

mrcow wrote: »

As I said though, even my GCSE and AS & A2 targets are taken as a guideline. No child's learning is linear. We don't all fit into those neat little boxes. No one should be boxed in by a target......especially one that has been set by one or two tests sat on some random day in May when you were 10.

You know that, I know that, but no-one seems to have told Gove.;) Foundation Stage profile of 6s and 7s MUST MEAN a Level 2 age 7, which obviously equates to a Level 4b aged 11, so why would they not get a C grade GCSE aged 16? :eek::eek::eek: Not a B or D, must be C.

bylromarha

balletshoes wrote: »

but you said it yourself - some primary level 5s are pointless. Your year 6 kids could have been levelled completely correctly, but what if the other feeder primary schools haven't? Isn't it then logical for the secondary school to test all the kids when they enter year 7, to ensure the children are set as fairly as possible?

To be fair, it was MrCow who said it.

The best solution is for the secondary teachers to work with the primary teachers to ensure all schools have a shared understanding of what the levels look like. By dismissing the results every year as pointless as some are pointless, it isn't solving the problem. So all our year 6s go into year 7 and waste time being retested and regraded, with their previous assessed pieces being disregarded as no one is actually getting to the nub of the problem.

balletshoes

bylromarha wrote: »

But a better solution is for the secondary teachers to work with the primary teachers to ensure all schools have a shared understanding of what the levels look like. By dismissing the results every year as pointless as some are pointless, it isn't solving the problem. So all our year 6s go into year 7 and waste time being retested and regraded, with their previous assessed pieces being disregarded as no one is actually getting to the nub of the problem.

I don't disagree with any of that - but as has been seen from this thread and the other one thats current at the moment, clearly not all primary schools are reading from the same sheet either.