I would give my students a simple vocab or comprehension diagnostic just to gauge my students and identify weaknesses and strengths.
Then a computer program came along that did a similar quick diagnostic and gave my students a reading level and a list of recommended books and took around 30 min. My students liked this test, especially the recommended reading. When standard testing came in to the US in the 90s it all went downhill. Meaningless stats that no one was either qualified or had the time to sift through. Students were disengaged from their reading score that seemed more punitive than encouraging. Not to mention the incredible time testing consumed and took away from lesson time. Highly damaging with little to recommend it.
The KS3 curriculum is definitely an issue, with far too little teaching and/or learning going on. I’m suspicious of further national testing though, as experience suggests it will result in teaching to the test as opposed to teaching the curriculum - at a stage when schools really have the opportunity (if they would but take it!) to engage the hard-to-reach through imaginative classroom practice. And where there is actually room for the creative subjects that can make all the difference to the academically disenchanted.
I'm definitely a ' let's have fewer tests' kinda gal. I think we're one a the few countries in Europe that have the equivalent of GCSEs at 16. Ditto that for Australia, USA, Canada and possibly New Zealand too. Currently GCSEs or the lack of the right ones at 'good grades ' can effectively put the lid on many school leavers prospects before they've even technically left school. If teachers aren't aware of which Year 8 kids need more support with reading after they've been in the school system for at least 8 years then something's badly wrong.
The way you explain why reading comprehension tests aren’t that helpful is so clear and concrete. Thank you!
When I first taught in the 80s,
I would give my students a simple vocab or comprehension diagnostic just to gauge my students and identify weaknesses and strengths.
Then a computer program came along that did a similar quick diagnostic and gave my students a reading level and a list of recommended books and took around 30 min. My students liked this test, especially the recommended reading. When standard testing came in to the US in the 90s it all went downhill. Meaningless stats that no one was either qualified or had the time to sift through. Students were disengaged from their reading score that seemed more punitive than encouraging. Not to mention the incredible time testing consumed and took away from lesson time. Highly damaging with little to recommend it.
The KS3 curriculum is definitely an issue, with far too little teaching and/or learning going on. I’m suspicious of further national testing though, as experience suggests it will result in teaching to the test as opposed to teaching the curriculum - at a stage when schools really have the opportunity (if they would but take it!) to engage the hard-to-reach through imaginative classroom practice. And where there is actually room for the creative subjects that can make all the difference to the academically disenchanted.
I'm definitely a ' let's have fewer tests' kinda gal. I think we're one a the few countries in Europe that have the equivalent of GCSEs at 16. Ditto that for Australia, USA, Canada and possibly New Zealand too. Currently GCSEs or the lack of the right ones at 'good grades ' can effectively put the lid on many school leavers prospects before they've even technically left school. If teachers aren't aware of which Year 8 kids need more support with reading after they've been in the school system for at least 8 years then something's badly wrong.