Showing posts with label SPAG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SPAG. Show all posts

Tuesday 4 July 2017

As results are announced keep the SATs in perspective - schools and children are much more than a test score

  Children’s author Michael Morpurgo, in a striking phrase, has referred to the SATs taken by 10 and 11 year olds as a ‘dark spider spreading fear in primary classrooms.’

Primary school headteachers were able to access their school’s results overnight and social media is buzzing with reactions.


The TES reports:

The government also published the tables which show how many marks are needed in each subject to reach a scaled score of 100, which is the “expected standard”.

This year pupils needed 26 out of 50 in reading, 57 out of 110 in maths and 36 out of 70 in spelling, punctuation and grammar (Spag) to reach the expected standard.


This compares to 21 out of 50 needed in reading last year, 60 out of 110 needed in maths and 43 out of 70 needed in Spag. The jump in the marks needed to pass the reading test comes after Year 6 teachers had reported that the reading test this year was “kinder” than it was in 2016.

The new tests were introduced last year and could not be compared with previous years. It would be a mistake to make too much of any comparison this year as leading experts suggest that the data is ‘too fragile’ to interpret with any confidence.


The TES reports Russell Hobby, General Secretary of the National Association of Headteachers:

Currently, the methods to hold schools to account aren’t as fair or reliable as they should be. Sats data only gives parents part of the picture when judging a pupil’s success or a school’s effectiveness.

At the moment, parents and schools know these results have to be taken with a pinch of salt. This can’t be right. Just looking at data misses the majority of the real work that schools do to help young people achieve their full potential.


Schools do need to be held to account but inspectors should look at more than just data. That way, when parents are reading Ofsted reports they can have more confidence that the report properly reflects how good the school actually is.


We are seeing the signs of a more balanced approach to the use of data by Ofsted, as expressed in a recent speech by Amanda Spielman, the chief inspector, in which she said, ‘Rather than just intensifying the focus on data, Ofsted inspections must explore what is behind the data, asking how results have been achieved.’

The issue of how results have been achieved is crucial.  Schools vary in their conduct of SATs and the amount of preparation. Concern about ‘teaching to the test’ in the last year of primary school, with a resulting narrowing of the curriculum and teachers and children feeling stressed by the pressure, has been widespread. Some schools hold special revision classes during the school holiday and others have endless practise tests.  Meanwhile children in private schools and those who are home-schooled escape the SATs completely.

Whatever one’s views we can probably all agree that schools and children are far more than a school. SAT results do not capture the many facets of a rich primary curriculum that will be familiar to many parents and that teachers struggle to provide despite all the pressure of SATs ‘success’.



 


Monday 25 July 2016

In pursuit of joy: what should we value in primary schools?

Guest blog by Emma Bishton, first published on her blog emmabishton.wordpress.com and by the Local Schools Network LINK

 
It's been a busy couple of weeks. No I don't mean trying to keep up with the headlines or the fallout from the headlines, though I can't say that isn't also a challenge. I mean domestically. It's the end of term, so there has been a procession of concerts and (intentionally) dramatic events to attend, a street fair, a fete, end of term assemblies and so on. This year is different because it's my daughter's last at primary school. Which means, of course, that she leaves not only with a set of wonderful memories and burgeoning opportunities, but with a set of SATS results.

A week or so ago we had our school summer concert (which I help with, as I'm involved with music at school). This was the 8th of these annual events, and quite possibly the best yet. They always follow the same format: choirs, ukulele group and recorder group have a standing slot, and most of the rest of the programme is given over to pupil performances - anything from solo songs to dance routines. Pupils audition for a slot in the programme, for which they devise and rehearse their own pieces. Variety is more important than perfection - over the years we've had all sorts from Mozart on the horn to solo renditions of Take That songs. This year, one of the highlights for me was the 'Kingfisher boys' -  a group of year 3 boys (complete with baseball caps), one singer in the middle of five dancers - including some rather skilful breakdancing. It wasn't note-perfect or movement-perfect. But it was exuberant, entertaining, and above all joyful. Like a lot else in the summer concert, it was impossible to watch without smiling.

The other thing that happened that day was that their school reports came out. These, for those lucky children in year 6, included their SATS results.  In an attempt to explain the reporting of SATS results, the headteacher usefully included a flyer  written for parents by the government Standards and Testing Agency. It goes on about the government's desire to raise standards, and includes statements which of course presage an intentionally higher number of 'failures' than previously:  "As the new standard is higher than the old one, fewer children have met the new expected standard than the previous standard", and then goes on to suggest that parents go online to find out how their child's results compare with the national average (which smacks rather of trying to generate fear of failure in parents as well as pupils, rather than drawing on the more positive effects of competition). The leaflet also suggests that tests and teacher assessments help teachers in secondary school to target extra help. Well my daughter's test results didn't tell us anything we didn't already know about her or anything she didn't already know about herself. Nor, more importantly, did they tell her teacher anything she didn't already know and couldn't already communicate to the secondary school in a teacher assessment.  So what, you might wonder, was the point of all that anguish back in May?

The leaflet appears to suggest that more children failing the tests will result in them having a better "mastery of the basics" (I'm really not sure that 'fronted adverbials' are basic, but that's another matter).  But whilst it's made clear that the SATS system has been specifically engineered to create more  'failures' than 'successes', for this year at least, the leaflet doesn't explain how 'failing' might actually help a child learn.  (I can of course see how such engineering will help the government claim to have  improved standards in a couple of years time, but that's another matter also.)  It doesn't explain it because it can't explain it. Back in May, my daughter feared the tests, though in the event she did fine. That fear wasn't productive, it was just a waste of emotional energy.  And generating fear of failure in parents by frequent use of words like 'mastery' and 'expected standard' is simply unacceptable, as well as being unlikely to result in pupils actually doing better.

In our summer concerts, on the other hand, there are no failures. In eight years of summer concerts, I have never seen a child crumble on stage. True, some enjoy performing more than others, some are more engaging than others, some have practised more or display more talent than others -  but they all get up on the stage and take pleasure in having done so. Those Kingfisher Boys applied themselves to the task, thought creatively and worked collaboratively, listened to advice and put it into practice (and rose to the challenge of performing in front of at least 200 people). All rather useful skills for life, let alone for learning.  But SATS tests don't value any of those attributes at all. Instead they have tested whether my daughter and her peers can produce a piece of writing in time and remember various facts and processes. I'm not seeking to denigrate the value of learning these things in themselves (except much of the content of the SPaG test, of course). But I question their value for our children's overall emotional and cognitive development. Children find joy in things that they value and that they get satisfaction from learning - whether that's on stage, on the cricket pitch or indeed, with a skilled teacher, in a classroom. And that joy spurs them on. Testing for the sake of testing, on the other hand, eviscerates joy.  I am heartily relieved, as my daughter prepares for secondary school, that she has been at a school which values the creative antics of boys in year 3 as highly as a few test results.

Tuesday 3 May 2016

SATs Protest: 'Parents, you have done us proud!' declare #LetKidsBeKids





The #LetKidsBeKid
s have issued the press release below after today's action:

 

To all of the parents, grandparents, friends, and most importantly, children who took part in an amazing today, a huge thank you! You are amazing people who have achieved something enormous! We salute you all! 
Thank you to all of the teachers and headteachers who supported both the events and the children in taking part. This has been in support of you. 
The press has played a massive part in the success of this campaign. We want to thank you for the interest you have shown and for the dedicated and thoughtful way in which so many of you have worked with the supporters of the campaign in order to enable us to share our opinions. In many cases, opinions that, as parents, you have shared with us. 
Thank you also to the many, many supporters who have rallied to the numerous calls to appear on radio and TV and to be interviewed for newspapers. You have done us all proud! It has been amazing to hear so many standing up for what they believe in. 
We have monitored the day from the tagboard http://bit.ly/KidsStrike3rdMayNow and have enjoyed watching the thousands of pictures coming in of children enjoying fun learning everywhere. We are happy to report that no child looked damaged or harmed in any way as a result of missing one day off school. Thank you for your concern DfE. Children visited museums, enjoyed woodland walks, learnt about democracy, engaged in scientific discovery, painted, sang, danced... they did all the things that kids should be doing. Today we Let Our Kids Be Kids. 
Highlights for us today were watching over 600 attendees and Children’s laureate Chris Riddell at the Brighton and Hove rally showing support for their amazing teachers; banner waving children handing over more than 47,000 signatures on our 38 Degrees petition to the DfE offices and knowing that at 12.30 we were united via this statement in shouting “Are you listening Nicky?” across the nation. We really hope she heard us... 
We were also encouraged to hear Nick Gibb MP so publicly demonstrating the problems with SAT tests on Radio 4 when attempting to answer questions for 11 year olds... he said ‘it’s not about him’ and he’s absolutely right. This is about OUR children who feel the pressure of these ridiculous tests just as he did today. 
Throughout the day over 400 events took place across the country; the absence letter has been downloaded over 63,000 times; our hashtag #KidsStrike3rdMay trended and we have been sent thousands of pictures of smiling happy children so far. 
We have a leading statistician compiling the figures (parents are statisticians too!) but for now are delighted to estimate that today we are reporting numbers in HIGH THOUSANDS. This is far bigger than we imagined this would become just over 5 weeks ago... what an amazing show of parent power!
    
This figure does not include the thousands of parents not able to strike due to work commitments who took letters into school to say they supported our action today and also want to see change.
We have shown in just over 5 weeks that there is an enormous enthusiasm nationwide for the cancellation of this year’s chaotic SAT tests. 
Today was about standing together to share our belief that the education system in this country is damaging our children. It was about making our voices heard. It was about working together to bring about change. It was just the start. 
Parents have shown their massive support today for their children’s teachers and have demonstrated clearly that they want to see a change. We need to see teachers, unions and the Government working together with us now to find a way that works. Not just a way to pass tests, but a way that encourages a lifelong love of learning in our children and that develops, through a curriculum rich in a wealth of experiences, the confidence, imagination and passion for learning that will help our children to succeed. 
The NAHT stated that ‘The government must step back from its piecemeal, last minute changes and engage with the profession now – well in advance of next year – in a fundamental review of assessment from reception to key stage three.’ Parents have shown today that they are offering teachers their full support - now. Please support us and act NOW to make this happen. 
To Nicky Morgan: we have shown you today that we want to discuss education with you. Teachers, parents and students. We are asking you again to do the right thing. 
Will you listen to us now?

Monday 28 March 2016

Michael Rosen spatchcocks SPAG

Government testing demands create a testing industry


Michael Rosen, broadcaster and children's author, has offered the text below to anyone campaigning on the current revised SATs and curriculum for primary schools.  I know SPAG is causing great stress for pupils and teachers, as well as those parents trying to help their children:

Nick Gibb has been on talking about how they've brought grammar back into schools. Please feel free to use any or all of the below as part of any campaign to oppose the Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar tests. 

1. Grammar was hardly taught in state primary schools in the 1950s. it was saved till secondary schools and then it was mostly in grammar schools,and top stream in secondary modern schools i.e. for about one third of all pupils, max.The most that was taught in primary schools, when I was at school, was noun, verb, adjective, adverb - not even subject, verb, object. I publicly call on him to show otherwise, by referring to the 11plus exams of the 1940s, 1950s and early 1960s. (I have now provided an example of these in another post here on Facebook. It confirms that many of the terms used in the SPaG were not used in the 1950s and that the questions were, as I remembered them, 'filling in the missing word' and identifying words that exemplified the most common terms.)

2. The grammar that was taught in grammar schools in the 1950s and early 60s was discontinued because after 25 years of O-level exams no evidence was found that teaching that kind of grammar was helping school students to write better. The evidence for this was in the O-level exam results themselves where no correlations were found between the 'grammar question' and the 'composition' question.

3. The grammar that Nick Gibb et al have introduced into schools is not there because anyone can or has shown that it improves children's writing. All it can ever show is that pupils incorporate elements of the grammar into their writing in formulaic, mechanical ways e.g. by random and artificial insertion of 'fronted adverbials', 'embedded relative clauses' and 'expanded noun phrases'.

4. The grammar they have introduced was only introduced because the Bew Report of 2011 said that it produced right/wrong answers in test situations. This is not true. It doesn't, as evidenced by the number of questions that produce several possible answers.

5. This kind of grammar is not directly related to how children and adults are using words and language as a whole. A good deal of it is made up of artificial sentences which children have to use to spot parts of speech. There is an alternative to this. It involves observing real language in use, how writers and speakers are using it to communicate and express themselves. It then can involve a combination of imitation, adaptation, invention and a limited amount of naming of parts.

6. Several of the categories in this government directed grammar are heavily disputed by grammarians. It's dishonest to pretend to children and teachers that they are not. It is also dishonest to pretend to children, parents and teachers that there are people who produce a fault-free way of speaking and writing. We all make errors and slips. We vary from each other in how we speak and write. That is because language is one kind of human behaviour so there is no reason to expect that it will be any more uniform than our clothes or our ways of dancing.

7. Our children are being put under stress to get difficult, abstract concepts learned off for these tests. It is very doubtful that many of them will understand the concepts being taught. This is evidenced by the fact that people who write the test papers and the homework booklets themselves don't appear to understand all the concepts involved. Part of the problem here is that the concepts themselves are nowhere near as watertight as it is claimed. `Language is far from suitable as a site for coming up with yes/no, right/wrong categories. Most linguists know this.