ATL

Key stage 2 SATs boycott - background

ATL/AMiE did not join NUT and NAHT in balloting for a boycott of Key Stage 2 SATs. But that's not because we believe, along with the NASUWT, that abolishing SATs is 'reckless' and will increase workload. The issue is much more complex.

In fact, we believe it is not tests themselves that do the damage. But if you use the data from a small number of tests in limited aspects of English and maths to rank schools' performance (and by implication their effectiveness overall), to measure teachers' capabilities, and as a basis for inspection decisions by Ofsted – to name only a few of the many purposes to which the data are put – then those tests become high stakes for everyone involved.

That's when pernicious effects are seen at classroom level: research commissioned during the Cambridge Primary Review quantified the time taken in preparing for and practising tests; ATL's own research explored the detrimental impact on the curriculum of the attention given to literacy, numeracy and science; and other studies have shown the differential impact of tests on the performance and attitudes of higher- and lower-achieving pupils.

Of course removing the tests would mean that children themselves wouldn't be put through this demoralising and demotivating rigmarole, an issue which was highlighted once again in impassioned speeches at ATL's annual conference. But replacing the SATs with teacher assessment, with data still used for the same high stakes purposes, could increase the burden on pupils as teachers continue to test, or to set up activities which can provide incontrovertible evidence to support their (now nationally measured) professional judgements.

So, instead of threatening industrial action to get rid of something, we have developed our own proposals for assessment. ATL's position statement, Assessing to learn: teachers at the heart of assessment, draws on other countries' systems to propose a combination of teacher-led formative assessment, national banks of tests used for summative purposes when teachers judge that learners are ready, and sample testing to meet national monitoring needs. The key is professional leadership of the assessment system, so that it supports teaching and engages learners, rather than narrowing the focus of both. A professional accountability system would ensure that schools are held to account for things that matter rather than things that can be tested.

We've made those points to successive secretaries of state, as well as putting the evidence into submissions to the select committee and in the assessment chapter of the ATL curriculum book, Subject to change. And changes have been made: an expert group on assessment was set up by government; report cards exploring broader measures are being piloted; sample testing will be used in science from this year; schools have access to single level tests, assessing pupil progress materials and other 'assessment for learning' approaches; and CPD for teachers in assessment is becoming more of a priority. We may not like the detail of all of these things, and the direction may change under the next government: AMiE/ATL will need to consider how to take our arguments forward.

The NAHT and NUT decision to boycott the SATs is likely to affect you. Advice for members in schools where senior leaders are members of NAHT or NUT is available here.

Need further advice?

Your first point of contact is your ATL rep in your school or college. Your local ATL branch is also available to help with queries, or you can contact ATL's member advisors on tel: 020 7930 6441 or email us. Please have your membership number to hand when telephoning and include it with any correspondence - this will help us to answer your query more quickly.