Thank you Justine Greening for calling a temporary halt to the indecent rate of change in primary assessment. However, as I ponder the fallout from this summers' KS2 tests, I would like to share this small piece of anecdotal evidence from Ben, a Y10 pupil (15 years of age) in the "top set" for maths, reported to be working at "level 8" (?) and on target to achieve A* in maths at GCSE. He last week volunteered to sit this summer's KS2 arithmetic paper for 11 year-olds: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524052/2016_ks2_mathematics_paper1_arithmetic_PDFA.pdf
This is Ben's feedback.
It took him 1 minute off the full allotted half an hour to complete the paper. He thinks he got one question wrong. He started confidently but as the paper went on he felt "quite depressed". At the end he felt "demoralised". He wondered:
1. What was the point of asking so many questions that tested the same thing: "It's the same stuff over and over, what is the point of that?" The first few pages were particularly depressing he said and he quickly became demoralised.
2. Why you would even need to do most of the calculations without a calculator: "It's a complete waste of time".
In terms of the Select Committee's inquiry into assessment (deadline this Friday!: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/education-committee/news-parliament-2015/primary-assessment-launch-16-17/
And Greening's recently announced consultation on assessment in the New Year, I think the following points are pertinent.
The length of the arithmetic paper is unreasonable and contributes nothing to useful assessment. If we must have an arithmetic paper (and the question remains as to why we do, as no evidence-based answer has been put forward to support this) then it should consist of a few, well-chosen questions to assess not simply an arithmetic procedure, or something that is better done with a calculator, but the pupil's ability to reason through an answer. The current paper, by asking a pupil to repeatedly reproduce similar procedures, smacks of trying to catch an 11 year-old out. Currently the KS2 arithmetic paper tests stamina and not mathematics.
Finally, if a high-attaining Y10 pupil, who is successful at maths and intends taking this at A level, is demoralised by this paper, we must ask what it is doing to everyone else.
It took him 1 minute off the full allotted half an hour to complete the paper. He thinks he got one question wrong. He started confidently but as the paper went on he felt "quite depressed". At the end he felt "demoralised". He wondered:
1. What was the point of asking so many questions that tested the same thing: "It's the same stuff over and over, what is the point of that?" The first few pages were particularly depressing he said and he quickly became demoralised.
2. Why you would even need to do most of the calculations without a calculator: "It's a complete waste of time".
In terms of the Select Committee's inquiry into assessment (deadline this Friday!: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/education-committee/news-parliament-2015/primary-assessment-launch-16-17/
And Greening's recently announced consultation on assessment in the New Year, I think the following points are pertinent.
The length of the arithmetic paper is unreasonable and contributes nothing to useful assessment. If we must have an arithmetic paper (and the question remains as to why we do, as no evidence-based answer has been put forward to support this) then it should consist of a few, well-chosen questions to assess not simply an arithmetic procedure, or something that is better done with a calculator, but the pupil's ability to reason through an answer. The current paper, by asking a pupil to repeatedly reproduce similar procedures, smacks of trying to catch an 11 year-old out. Currently the KS2 arithmetic paper tests stamina and not mathematics.
Finally, if a high-attaining Y10 pupil, who is successful at maths and intends taking this at A level, is demoralised by this paper, we must ask what it is doing to everyone else.
