A few weeks ago, it seemed that everyone had an opinion on the SATs, regardless of whether they’d ever seen a copy of the papers, let alone taught Year 6. This time last year, I knew nothing about them. Now that I’ve spent nine months teaching Year 6, I am confident that I still have to a lot to learn, but also that there is a lot for all teachers to learn from the SATs and their place in our education system.

To have the unique opportunity, as a secondary-trained English teacher, to teach KS2, 3 and 4 this year is something I’ll be forever grateful for. It’s given me a real insight into where Year 7 pupils have come from and allowed me to develop my own subject knowledge. It’s enabled me to start planning a KS3 to 4 English curriculum which builds on and extends the knowledge and skills taught in KS1 and 2. It’s also led me to have an opinion on KS2 assessment.

The KS2 SATS, as they are, aren’t very useful. The ability to read an unseen text, understand its meaning and answer comprehension questions appears something that will continue to be useful throughout a pupil’s life. However, without any specific scientific, historic or geographic content requirement alongside this, the SATs (and the preparation which precedes them in many schools) don’t develop pupil knowledge of a range of topics which could really benefit them later on in life. It is commonly known that reading comprehension depends heavily on prior knowledge, so why are our standardised assessments not measuring the breadth of knowledge which pupils have retained?

Teaching content for the grammar paper should be incredibly helpful. In a perfect world, to teach KS1-2 pupils the key concepts and rules which their language is based around should deepen their understanding and improve their application to writing in KS3 and beyond. But it doesn’t. Come September of Year 7, many 11-year-olds around the country are set off on sequences of lessons which focus on ‘GCSE-style skills’ such as analysis and evaluation, never revisiting those grammar terms again. And why would those Year 7 teachers bother? No exam those pupils go on to sit aged 16 will require them to remember or identify the terms.

So, Year 6s around the country are learning the names of grammar terms which the British school system will never require them to use again after the age of 11. This seems like madness to me.

Over the past few months I’ve read and heard so many reasons why the SATs are ‘bad’. From my perspective, the inherent problem with the SATs is not that assessing 11-year-olds is wrong. It’s that the SATs require 11-year-olds to learn a great deal of information which they don’t get opportunities to practise or use again. What kind of culture or work ethic is that instilling in our children?

Year 6 national assessments should require pupils to learn something which feeds directly into their next stage to learning and assessment, ultimately their GCSEs. I personally believe that grammar should be part of this, along with reading and writing a range of text types and genres, and specific history, geography, RE and science content. But regardless of the details, the focus should surely be on consistently developing our pupils from age four upwards all the way to age 18, not starting again aged 11.

I’m privileged enough to work at an all-through school where, from next year, our Year 6s will become our Year 7s. Our teachers can work in collaboration from KS2 to 3 and beyond, valuing knowledge retention and skill development right through a child’s educational experience. Across the country, however, this treatment of knowledge as a means to an end, as yet another disposable commodity of 21st Century Britain, will continue.

The SATs are not the problem; the entire British assessment system is.