SATs

[Blue_Marigold]

And sorry if I insulted your intelligence - a couple of posts up someone asked if good SATs meant better GCSEs, that's all.

Sorry that was me! I am sorry for coming across as unintelligent but I still don't understand...

[SteveDH]

very very very roughly speaking.
You take the average score of everyone doing sats for a particular year group. If the average for that year group is low then boundaries are adjusted so that fewer people get good grades at gcse. If the year group does well then the boundaries are adjusted so that more people do well.

[PurpleDuck]

The former - each cohort has been 'measured' several times - KS1, KS2 - and so if they are weaker than the previous years then % good GCSE grades will be decided with that in mind.

This is an external 'check' on exam boards.

Thank you, I didn't realise that's how it's done. So, in the simplest terms, the exam boards could roughly project, if they wanted, five years in advance what their grade boundaries will be? I've always thought the 'cohort' thing is based only on how well a particular year group does in a given year's set of exams, i.e. if everyone's GCSEs scores are a bit week this year, for example, than a grade boundary for A* will be lower than in a year when the overall GCSEs performance is stronger, a bit like with the 11+ pass marks being lower for weaker cohorts.

very very very roughly speaking.
You take the average score of everyone doing sats for a particular year group. If the average for that year group is low then boundaries are adjusted so that fewer people get good grades at gcse. If the year group does well then the boundaries are adjusted so that more people do well.

I have to admit this feels a bit counter-intuitive to me: what is the point of adjusting the boundaries for low achieving cohorts in such a way that it effectively prevents them from getting good GCSE grades? If this is the case, then indeed, why should they bother to try and do their best in a secondary school if the outcome is largely pre-determined? Is this really the case of 'poor SATs result will condemn you for the rest of your school education'?

Based on all conversations around SATs I've had at the school gate over the years, a vast majority of parents have no idea at all that there is a formal link between the SATs and GCSE results. The first time I've ever heard about it was on this forum, the schools never hinted on this!

[PurpleDuck]

I think that most of us are grasping that (sorry, that is meant to be a factual comment, not a catty one ), but possibly some of us may be thinking that it would be poetic justice for the 'don't bother to try, darling, it's for somebody else's benefit, not yours' to suffer more than the ones who are encouraged to try to do their best whatever the task in hand....

Well it's just one more reason to say 'don't bother to try darling it's for someone else's benefit' isn't it? I told my lot that SATs weren't important for them as I saw the stress they were under from school and I fundamentally disagree(d) with high-stakes tests for young children. There is a lot of press this time around about the inadequacy of these tests and the hideous effects early summative testing is having on children so I think any parent would be justified in trying to play them down as much as possible.

And sorry if I insulted your intelligence - a couple of posts up someone asked if good SATs meant better GCSEs, that's all.

Oh dear, it was me, maybe I shouldn't have asked. Perhaps all my intelligence is gone, assuming I had any in the first place. A good thing is that lack of intelligence often prevents one from feeling offended.

As for SATs and trying hard/doing one's best, I strongly believe in encouraging children to try and do their best in all they do, regardless of what comes out of it. Most children are good at certain things and not so good at others, so the outcome will vary, but that should not prevent them from trying. Equally strongly, I disagree with putting loads of pressure on children to perform well in their SATs just for the sake of the SATs outcome. Take a long view if you wish and build up to KS2 SATs from year 3, but piling on pressure in the last few weeks before SATs is just unfair. I agree with Amber - I also told my children they didn't need to worry about SATs as they worked hard enough at school and should be proud whatever the result.

[moved]

Year 9 SATs used to also give information regarding a cohort. After the debacle a few years ago when the results were severely delayed year 9 SATs stopped.

The main problem is actually with GCSEs. They are not calibrated in any way. The SATs use a system that means the questions are trialled sufficiently to allow for an accurate assessment of a cohort and individual children. They are, sadly, the best tests that our children sit. I have been embarrassed at international conferences to admit that our university entrance exams don't use the same system know as 'item response theory'.

There is supposed to be a test now in year 11 that will be taken by a sample of children every year to enable the GCSEs to be calibrated. This stops any claims of or actual grade inflation.

[Guest55]

The last compulsory KS3 tests were 2008; they were abandoned by an unexpected Government statement in October 2008. I think they were stopped to save money as there was extensive trialling and about three times the number of questions needed were developed.

Papers continued to be produced for schools to buy for a few years but the demand waned.