Leading Articles

null -1° London Hi 5°C / Lo 2°C

Leading article: A test that deserved to fail

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

You could, if you were of a cynical cast of mind, argue that the Government has exploited the big news of the banking rescue to "bury" a slew of reversals in other areas. These would include the abandonment of the anti-terrorist measures discussed in another of today's leading articles, and the abolition – announced out of the blue by the Children's Secretary, Ed Balls, yesterday – of national tests for 14-year-olds. Political opportunism cannot be excluded. But that does not mean that the decision taken on testing was not the right one.

National testing has a place, and an important one, in the schools system of England and Wales. It offers parents and ministers a gauge of how children, teachers and schools are performing against a national standard – information that was not available, or at least not openly and systematically, before. Of course, testing has its downside, too. There is substance in charges that too many teachers "teach to the test"; that pupils learn less about reading and writing than how to pass tests; and that schools (and ministers) have mastered the finer arts of statistical manipulation to present themselves in the best light.

But the most compelling criticism, from parents and teachers, was always that pupils were over-tested. Objections to national tests for seven- year-olds (key stage 1) were addressed by making the timing flexible and having the tests marked in school by teachers. Now, in a move surely precipitated by this summer's marking shambles, tests for 14-year-olds have been summarily abolished. This was a sensible move, if overdue. With GCSEs, A-levels and now the new diplomas, pupils could face national tests of some kind in four out of five consecutive years; key stage 2 testing was a natural candidate for the chop. Schools will now be judged by their results in GCSEs and the rest, augmented by a standardised national report card – which should suffice.

This leaves the SATs taken by 11-year-olds as the only externally set and marked tests pupils take before GCSEs. That we now have a system that looks remarkably like the one that preceded the decade-long preoccupation with testing will leave many parents asking whether a similar result – improved accountability – might not have been achieved with less pain.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Columnist Comments

deborah_orr

Deborah Orr: One more inquiry isn't going to help

I don't believe a public inquiry into the Baby P case is necessary

hamish_mcrae

Hamish McRae: It will take time, but we'll recover

If officialdom seems over-optimistic in its forecasts, the markets seem too pessimistic

janet_street_porter

Janet Street-Porter: Mother does not always know best

One of the most sensitive subjects for writers is the mother-daughter relationship

mark_steel

Mark Steel: Never mind the baby, just get back to work

The next thing will be an exciting new scheme known as the 'workhouse'