Go to navigation
It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:09 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:19 pm
Posts: 85
magwich2 wrote:
Regarding the SATs we decided not to make our DD2 take them at all as they are rubbish and her lack of SATs results have never had any effect at all.
.


It is amusing that a parent enters their child for the 11+ which is a competition, an exam to determine ability, then wants to boycott SATS. Will the same parent boycott GCSEs and "A" levels and a degree exams?

Every child should be forced to undertake a SATS test every single year. If the child does not want to it then the child has a choice to sit and not answer any question, get zero percent and be placed in a remedial group for at least one term.

Any teacher who boycotts the SATS tests should be sacked. What sort of country is this when mere employees dictate what they will and will not do? If they won't do the job, then they should resign or be sacked.

It's like a "check out assistant" stating I will not scan Cadbury chocolate as I do not think people should eat it. Stop pussy footing around, the government will dictate what a teacher does, if they don't like it then the teacher should find another job.

You guessed it, I also believe strikes should be banned. Minimum wage and health and safety regulations protect employees.
Replace the right to strike with the right to resign.

If a person is not happy with their terms and conditions, salary or anything else, then they should leave. In effect isn't this what Richard Brason said to his Virgin cabin crew?

Would BA pilots leave? No, they would not get a higher paid job with another airline.
Would London underground drivers get a higher paid driver job? No.

I bet every school is supplied with SATS results and I bet some sort of streaming does occur. Grammar schools may even stream on 11+ results as many grammar schools will be full of children who achieve 5A and 5B in year 6.


Last edited by BoltBlue on Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am
Posts: 8113
Boltblue, you know as well as everyone else on here that SATS were set up as a measure of the school and not the child, unlike 11+, A levels, degree etc which are a measure of the child's ability and work.

I haven't read your other posts, maybe you are having a bad day - maybe you would like to apologise teachers who I consider still have a professional role and status and while technically employed have views and experience of education.

I rely on them to educate my children and rely on their professional advice. Hence my kids either did not do SATS or did not know they were doing them (their teachers managed it very well)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Posts: 866
I don't think these are very good analogies, BoltBlue.
The 11+ is a necessary exam in order to attend a secondary school of one's choice. The SATs are not and nor do they test the very able in any meaningful way. There may well be schools which are so useless that not every child is literate and numerate by the end of year 6 but where children are going to get level 5 they spend/waste more than a school year on pesky exams which prove nothing at all.
If one does not think something is valid then one should, in my opinion, protest against it - otherwise we will have more and more nonsensical tests, initiatives, exams, policies etc etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:19 pm
Posts: 85
hermanmunster wrote:
Boltblue, you know as well as everyone else on here that SATS were set up as a measure of the school and not the child, unlike 11+, A levels, degree etc which are a measure of the child's ability and work.

I haven't read your other posts, maybe you are having a bad day - maybe you would like to apologise teachers who I consider still have a professional role and status and while technically employed have views and experience of education.

I rely on them to educate my children and rely on their professional advice. Hence my kids either did not do SATS or did not know they were doing them (their teachers managed it very well)
mike1880 wrote:
:lol: There is no legitimate way of avoiding SATS, you'll be amazed how fanatical the school is about her taking them and you'll wonder why they're so much more focussed on them than they ever have been about the things that actually matter.


Correct. Revise and revise just as students doing GCSEs, "A" levels and degrees. What is the issue?

RAM SATS down their little throats and increase the school rating. Isn't this what happens at grammar schools, many which start GCSEs one year early and some do over 15 GCSEs to boost school ratings (LSS)!

Start early and do it every year. Once SATS is over, do the "arty farty" stuff that is may be fun for some, but utterly useless for many. Spend the school days on school trips in the warmer months. What will the children learn after SATS? Nothing. Let them do school plays and the other useless activities after SATS. School plays... fun for the people with a main part, but totally boring for the rest. A complete waste of time for many. What is the point of wasting weeks for a child to go on stage for 30 seconds, utter one word and come off? Educational value = zero.

Take the children out of school an go on holiday and mess up the school attendance record. Pay the fine if they dare and then slag the school off for having utterly useless teachers and ignoring the children who have been pushed by parents to learn year 7 work in year 6.

11+ means self inflicted bordem. Accept it. A child who is tutored for the 11+ (includes parents teaching) should expect their child to be bored in year 5 and 6, and to learn absolutely nothing in Maths and English. Don't blame the school. Blame the parents and the system. Schools cannot afford to teach 11+ children seperately, nor do I expect it. Mine were bored!


Last edited by BoltBlue on Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 2237
I see no need to make an argument in response. I think anyone interested in the subject can simply read your posts and draw their own conclusions.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:19 pm
Posts: 85
hermanmunster wrote:
Boltblue, you know as well as everyone else on here that SATS were set up as a measure of the school and not the child, unlike 11+, A levels, degree etc which are a measure of the child's ability and work.

I haven't read your other posts, maybe you are having a bad day - maybe you would like to apologise teachers who I consider still have a professional role and status and while technically employed have views and experience of education.

I rely on them to educate my children and rely on their professional advice. Hence my kids either did not do SATS or did not know they were doing them (their teachers managed it very well)



SATS was supposed to be for schools, but we all know it is what parents use to determine how their children do and show off that their children are at 5A. If SATS was for schools then they would not give results to children. So, SATS is for children.
SATS is used to stream children in groups, this is obvious.

I don't rely on teachers to educate my children at primary schools. School is for socialising. 11+ meant I had to educate my children myself, who passed the 11+ and learnt zero at school in maths. The school was a hinderence forcing them to carry at the bottom when adding in columns (and circling every sum). I complained and told them to stop their nonsense and inefficient method which meant the eye re-scanning. Carrying at the top is faster (scientifically proven!) My child was not going to relearn something he had done for 2 years. I told the teacher to teach the class the way she wanted, but not to try and "correct" my children as I had given them explicit instructions not to carry at the bottom under any circumstances. It was petty nonsense.

If a teacher wants to boycott SATS, they should not be paid their salary as they are not doing what they have been paid to do.
I would sack them. A teacher is an employee. They must follow their employers' instructions or leave. They cannot dictate what they will or will not do. I stand by this comment.

Professionals do not boycott tests. They do the job they are paid to do and listen to their employers! If they don't like it, they leave. So, forgive me if I do not regard teachers who boycott SATS as professionals.


Last edited by BoltBlue on Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:40 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:19 pm
Posts: 85
The forum was a bit boring... a bit of healthy debate is what I thought!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:39 pm
Posts: 508
boltblue wrote:
Correct. Revise and revise just as students doing GCSEs, "A" levels and degrees. What is the issue?

RAM SATS down their little throats and increase the school rating. Isn't this what happens at grammar schools, many which start GCSEs one year early and some do over 15 GCSEs to boost school ratings (LSS)!

Start early and do it every year. Once SATS is over, do the "arty farty" stuff that is may be fun for some, but utterly useless for many. Spend the school days on school trips in the warmer months. What will the children learn after SATS? Nothing. Let them do school plays and the other useless activities after SATS. School plays... fun for the people with a main part, but totally boring for the rest. A complete waste of time for many. What is the point of wasting weeks for a child to go on stage for 30 seconds, utter one word and come off? Educational value = zero.

Take the children out of school an go on holiday and mess up the school attendance record. Pay the fine if they dare and then slag the school off for having utterly useless teachers and ignoring the children who have been pushed by parents to learn year 7 work in year 6.

11+ means self inflicted bordem. Accept it. A child who is tutored for the 11+ (includes parents teaching) should expect their child to be bored in year 5 and 6, and to learn absolutly nothing in Maths and English. Don't blame the school. Blame the parents and the system. Schools cannot afford to teach 11+ children seperately.


Goodness - who rattled your cage Boltblue?

In my opinion of course schools should be able and willing to teach all children - from the least able to the most able! Children who pass the 11+ still deserve to have a good year 5 and 6 and to continue to progress. I do not think schools should spend all their time in Y 6 pulling up the weaker students to 4B - as others have said SATs are a measure of the school, not the individual - unlike the other exams. A bit of practice is fine - alongside other stuff too.
And of course they should also be able to do the fun stuff - I think it is offensive for you to denegrate anything other than pure academics to 'arty farty fun stuff'!! Life is about balance, and, although I have 2 clever DD's - one of whom has just passed the 11+, I would hate for them not to be able to do any art, drama, dance, sport etc because they were busy having SATs 'rammed down their throats!!' - that would make me take them out of the school!

Are you angry with your own childs school? Have you spoken to them? Like Herman I think you cannot tar all teachers, and parents with one brush!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 2237
BoltBlue wrote:
The forum was a bit boring... a bit of healthy debate is what I thought!


Ranting, no matter how enjoyable (I do plenty of it myself) is inimical to healthy debate.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:19 pm
Posts: 85
mike1880 wrote:
BoltBlue wrote:
The forum was a bit boring... a bit of healthy debate is what I thought!


Ranting, no matter how enjoyable (I do plenty of it myself) is inimical to healthy debate.

Mike


What I found interesting was LSS prospectus...

During KS4, students study 9 or 10 GCSEs. Really? Last year the average was 15.2 GCSEs. Isn't this somewhat misleading?

RE is compulsory as a full or half GCSE. Half a GCSE? Have time changed.

LSS takes 94 children, and then they stated they took 116 of which 18 were on appeal.
Does this mean another 5.5 children per class = average class size 29 as opposed to 23.5?

Does anyone know whether boys are forced to play Rugby, or can they choose to play football?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016