Skip to main content

Lots of testing, very little learning.

"I don't understand why I have to do all these tests. I mean, it's not as if I'm learning anything."

These were the words of my son, a few days ago.

My son is in P7, his final year of primary school, and so far his year has been blighted. Blighted by tests, dozens and dozens of them. Blighted by the incessant, soul destroying grind that is the transfer test, formerly known as the 11 plus.

Since Easter, the entire focus of his schooling has been working towards the transfer test in November. The intensity is building up. First practice tests completed in April, May, June. Then, the summer revision pack, "just to keep his eye in". And now he's in P7, all systems are go: 2 practice tests a week, another to do at home at weekends. When he's not doing a practice test, he's reviewing a completed practice test or practising for the next practice test.

The tests he does are either numeracy or literacy or both and that is all he does; day in, day out. And all because of the transfer test. And when I say transfer test, I actually mean transfer tests, 5 of them! 12th November, 19th November (2 tests), 26th November and 3rd December.

And then there are the parents! Crazy, stressed, panicking parents, desperate for their little darlings to live up to their parents' aspirations - tutoring, extra revision, pressure, pressure, pressure. We've not gone down that route, which makes us feel intermittently smug that we're not succumbing to the system and intermittently guilty that we're not good parents seeking to do the best for our child!

"And what's it all for?" I hear you ask. Well, it's all about getting a place in grammar school. Despite the fact that the final official 11-plus took place in 2008, no satisfactory measures were put in place to deal with the transfer of pupils from primary to post-primary education, as the grammar schools insisted that they continue to have the right to select pupils on the basis of academic assessment.

Northern Ireland has, notionally, a two tier post-primary education system; grammar schools and secondary schools. In theory, grammar schools are elite academic institutions while secondary schools pick up those who do not wish to pursue an academic career or who fail to achieve the standard required to enter the grammar school. I say in theory because, as Slugger O'Toole points out in their article on grammar school intake, many grammar schools accept pupils who are well down the academic scale. Equally, many secondary schools offer A-levels and the best secondary schools achieve results that can often compare with those of grammars.

As a result of this, my son has to take two different types of entrance test - one offered by a local consortium, the Association for Quality Education and the other by GL Assessment. One of the schools he is likely to be applying to can be seen in the Slugger article above to accept pupils from right across the academic scale. The other only accepts high achievers, creaming the top 170-odd pupils from the 400-ish 10 and 11 year olds who sit the test.

My son will probably do pretty well, possibly very well - he's bright and able - unless he has an off-day; starts to daydream; spots something interesting out the window. (cue onset of parental panic...) He's aiming for the high achieving school. If he fails, he will most certainly do well enough to get into the second choice. He'd have to mess up big time for that not to happen. His primary school knows this. The teachers in the school know their pupils and know who is academically able and also who has strengths in other areas. But the test is king and must be obeyed. In the meantime, in the words of my son, he's not been learning anything.

So we're up early tomorrow morning for the first of the four Saturdays of testing hell. We all can't wait for it to be over.

I wish it wasn't this way, but it is, so all I can say is "good luck wee man".

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Just saying...

I found myself perusing Microsoft's Innovative Education Forum website earlier today to see what was what and I thought I'd have a quick look at the FAQs. And then I came across Question 12... Now, I'm not making a major point here, but it just jarred somewhat to see these restrictions placed on a conference aimed at celebrating innovation. Not even a sneaky wee photo of a key note speaker to pop onto Flickr or a handy flip video of a top demonstration to share on YouTube??? Wouldn't that create a bit of buzz and excitement? Guess we'll never know! Hmmm....

Call me a pedant...

Alastair Darling spoke on Eddie Mair's show on Radio 4 this evening. He was talking about the steps George Osborne is taking to address the banking system and its perceived problems. In relation to these steps, Mr Darling said that "no banking system can ever be safe" but that any steps being taken should be intended to "make the system safer". Clearly this makes no sense. If the system cannot be safe, then surely it cannot therefore be SAFER ie more safe. Call me a pedant Mr Darling, but I think you meant that the steps would make the system less unsafe. I just hope I haven't made any spelling or grammatical errors in this post! That is all...