Why more tests are a good thing

Weighing the pig - the high-stakes nature of SATs has made ‘testing’ a dirty word. But in the hands of teachers, more tests can be a good thing, says Michael Tidd...

It’s not often I find myself sounding more old-fashioned that the Education Secretary, but on this occasion I want to say something even he might struggle to utter: I think teachers should create more tests and I think children should be tested more often.

I realise this is not a widely-held view in the profession, not least in primary schools, but hear me out. You could be forgiven for thinking I favour data over learning. However, I am not suggesting for a moment that we need more tests provided by the DfE, Ofsted or anyone else. I want to argue that testing is a perfectly reasonable and useful form of assessment, so long as it is owned by the teacher in the classroom.

It might be true that weighing a pig does not fatten it, but I would be surprised if any prize-winning pig farmer didn’t keep a close eye on the scales while he devised the feeding programme for his prime porkers. In fact, you can be pretty sure that pigs of that sort are measured frequently – be it on scales, by tape measure, or maybe even Body Mass Index! The point is not that weighing fattens the pig; it is that the farmer uses regular weighing and measuring to plan his programme of interventions to achieve the best possible outcome.

I have noted that testing is already widespread, but while the QCA optional tests are great if you want to allocate scores and levels, they’re pretty useless as a formative teaching tool. Similarly, although a thorough analysis of Key Stage 2 tests can benefit the school, it is not much help to those students who have already moved on. What I’m advocating is the use of regular formal assessment throughout the Key Stage that can provide feedback for teachers and improve the teaching process. I’m not advocating the mass central publication of tests that schools then buy in (or are forced to use), but rather locally-created assessment tools to match locally-created curricula. And perhaps I should stress now: a test doesn’t always have to look like a test.
In the Early Years classroom, nobody would expect children to take a 45-minute silent written paper. Yet I am certain children are asked to complete tasks such as writing their name, or matching numbers to objects. These tasks are merely a test in a more suitable form.
I have used a variety of tests this year. In the October half term I gave KS2 students a paper test with questions and boxes for answers. But it was not just a standardised test paper to get a score. I selected and created questions that matched the content I had taught. I wanted to see which students could still use column addition outside of the context of a two-week block on the subject. I also wanted to know which of them really understood why we have phases of the moon. I don’t think a paper test actually does any damage, but I do think that, to be of any use, the test needs to match the curriculum and the students – not just provide data for league tables.

I’ve used a host of other testing techniques. Occasionally I use a starter in a maths lesson that is essentially five questions based on content I’ve taught in the past weeks. It’s not an uncommon technique in primary schools. We don’t usually call it a test (I called it a ‘review’ with my children), but that’s essentially what it is.

I’ve also set some optional tests via our learning platform: 10 multiple-choice questions that relate directly to our learning for that week. I have not made the tests excessively demanding. I’ve called them ‘quizzes’ and I’ve praised those who have taken them (they do so because they enjoy them). They are, in effect, tests that have given the students an opportunity to revisit and refresh their learning, and to use the structure of multiple choice to review learning in a low-stakes environment.

The key here is the low-stakes nature of the tests. My aim is never to catch students out, or to reward or punish outcomes. Rather, these assessments allow me to make frequent judgements about how effective my teaching has been, and to adapt it accordingly. It isn’t about scores, or percentages, or league tables; it’s about tailored assessment to match my students and my curriculum.

About the author

Michael Tidd is a Year Leader at Vale First & Middle School in Sussex. You can read his blog on education at: michaelt1979.wordpress.com