North East school leaders give their views on exams next year
As schools begin to prepare for September, we asked school leaders what their biggest concerns were about the Government plans for next year, specifically the plans to reintroduce accountability measures.
Exams and KS5 and KS4
We first asked what ‘catch-up’ changes schools would like to see to KS5 and KS4 exams. The most popular response was a reduction in content in individual subjects, with 61% supporting this. This was followed by greater optionality in exams with 52.5%. ‘Reducing grade boundaries’, ‘More open book examinations’, and ‘delayed exam dates’ all were voted for by 40% of respondents. A reduction in the number of subjects taught only had 3.4% support, showing this to be an unpopular option. Several gave other options, and a common theme in these was a reduction in the exam element in certain subjects, and in general less of a focus on exam results.
Only one of the options then had significant levels of support, and this was backed up in comments elsewhere in the survey which emphasised that there is not a simple answer to the learning loss, especially at this stage when the extent of learning loss is unclear.
KS1 and KS2 SATs
There was overwhelming opposition to whether KS1 and KS2 SATs should go ahead. 88.7% responded that KS1 SATs should not go ahead, and 77.8% that KS2 SATs should not go ahead.
From those who opposed SATs going ahead this year, there was a broad consensus on the reasons why. As pupils return, schools want to concentrate on getting children back into learning and socialising. The damage caused by the Covid-19 lockdown would need to be undone slowly and gradually, respondents said, without having to worry about testing at this stage.
This recovery would also have to be done without a narrowing of the curriculum, which might be at risk if the focus is too much on SATs. Respondents wanted a focus on key skills, mental health and wellbeing, that would ensure children are ready to learn. A broad curriculum was seen as necessary for ‘catch up’.
As well as this broader curriculum, schools were worried about how useful SATs will be in addressing the learning loss. Pupils have already missed too much learning, and preparing for tests may mean more learning time is lost. Pupils will have had a variety of experiences of online and remote learning, and especially those from disadvantaged and vulnerable backgrounds may have experienced a greater learning loss. SATs and high stakes accountability may damage their self-confidence if they have poorer outcomes and differences in results could have an affect on future targets and expectations. As such, SATs are unlikely to be useful for comparisons, and are likely to not treat all pupils fairly.
On this point of high stakes accountability, respondents felt that SATs were merely an accountability measure, arguing that teachers should be trusted to make assessments, with some expressing a preference for continuous low stakes assessments to inform gap analysis.
Finally, concerns were raised about the stress and pressures that would be put on children and staff alike. KS1 and KS2 SATs were seen as placing undue pressure on staff and children during a normal year. With schools facing a year of uncertainty, removing SATs could enable schools to provide a bespoke curriculum tailored to the needs of their children.
From those that supported SATs, there were some similarities in opinions. They recognised that SATs as an accountability measure weren’t helpful, but keeping them on as a means to baseline assessments would be useful. Indeed, this particular criticism of SATs was likely held by all, as when we asked about suspension of league tables, everyone responded that they should be. In terms of how long league tables should be suspended for, 52% said for the full year, 48% for more than a year.
In general, there was much stronger support for KS2 SATs, as they were seen as a necessary part of transition from primary to secondary, with respondents saying that allowing KS2 SATs would prevent further disruption to this process.
In our wider questions about concerns around exams, many of the issues discussed above were reiterated, especially around the ability to deliver content in the time available. These concerns were particularly acute around KS4, with more confidence expressed for KS5 where there had been better engagement with online learning.
The opposition to high stakes accountability was also further discussed with reference to what role Ofsted might play next academic year, with opposition expressed to a return to normal inspections.
Within these legitimate concerns about next year, one response did strike a more positive note, saying: ‘We have found children returning have not dropped anywhere near how much we thought they would. We are in a disadvantaged area and are confident that good teaching next year will enable them to reach their full potential.’
Schools now need clarity and more information on what adjustments can be expected to exams next year to ensure they can plan and address the learning loss. To that end we have contacted a number of senior figures to attend a roundtable discussion with the NE school leaders. We can now confirm that representatives from Ofqual will be attending our roundtable on Monday next week, so that North East leaders can hear from them, and have the opportunity to ensure that Ofqual properly understand the concerns and hopes of North East school leaders regarding this subject.