The Government has issued a leaflet for parents about a new hurdle for children starting school in September– the reception baseline assessment (RBA). The public relations effort issued by the Standards and Testing Agency is called ‘Information for Parents’, but it presents a highly misleading view of the controversial baseline test and what it might mean for children.
The Government has never asked parents whether they approve of testing young children as they start school, but a recent YouGov survey found only 6 per cent of parents thought it was important to test maths and English as children start school, while the vast majority prioritised settling in, making friends and enjoying the school day. After all the disruption of the pandemic many people put children’s wellbeing first, including the House of Lords scrutiny committee. But the government is determined to barrel on with its plans.
Unlike the cosy cover photo showing two children engaging with their teacher over a shared picture book, the reality of the baseline test involves children taken away from ordinary activities one by one, and faced with a scripted series of test questions. The leaflet tells parents that their child will be ‘participating in the reception baseline assessment’, rather than baldly admitting that each child will sit a formal test which will assign them a single number score for literacy, maths and language skills.
‘The RBA is not about judging or labelling your child or putting them under any pressure,’ the leaflet says, explaining that its purpose is to judge schools, not pupils. But the RBA will judge children. The leaflet says claims that the RBA will give teachers ‘a helpful snapshot of where your child is when they enter reception, so they can be supported in the most appropriate way.’ In other words, narrow and unreliable test results will be presented to teachers as a judgement on children’s skills. The best hope is that teachers will ignore the test verdict: 80 per cent of teachers in the RBA pilot thought the results gave an inaccurate account of the children’s learning.
Contrary to the reassuring statement that ‘your child is unlikely to even know that they are doing an assessment’, evidence from the RBA pilot showed that children were likely to understand that they were being tested and that some children became distressed. ‘Lots of children noticed if I was clicking no, or giving them a x on my list and got upset they had got it wrong. They were very aware they were being "tested",' reported one reception teacher.
Perhaps the fact that the RBA uses children as data points with no intention to benefit them was too stark a message to share with parents. The leaflet claims the RBA will benefit children by providing ‘valuable one-to-one time with their teacher at an early stage’. Teachers disagree: 69 per cent surveyed after the RBA pilot disagreed that RBA ‘helped to develop positive relationships with the children in Reception’, while half thought it actually had a negative effect on most children. The RBA takes the teacher out of the classroom for many hours. 'Spending 20 mins outside the classroom per child in different intervals takes you away from bonding and forming relationships with the other 29 children you have in the classroom,' said a teacher.
Bizarrely, the Government claims a benefit for parents, too: After seven years, when the Government uses the secret data to compare with children’s scores at the end of primary school, parents could find out how well the school is judged to have performed over that period. Setting aside the point that such a comparison won’t work, it’s hard to see how a parent of a four-year-old will benefit from hearing after their child leaves a school whether it’s been a good school after all.
The leaflet includes quotes from one school leader acting as a cheerleader for the RBA. But 86 per cent of headteachers express negative views of RBA, with comments such as: 'Ridiculous! There is nothing wrong with the way in which Early Years staff assess the children on entry in the Reception class at the moment. They don't need a 'formalised' way of doing this.'
There is acknowledgement that parents have a right to see the RBA statements about their child if they request them, but not of the still contested point of whether parents have a right to agree or withhold permission for their child to be tested in the first place.
Pity the unfortunate civil servant tasked with writing the RBA information for parents. How can you sell a product that is scorned by teachers and headteachers and offers nothing good for children and their families? Parents know what really counts is that their child is happy, secure, and flourishing as they start school. The RBA is a costly, time-consuming distraction from what children need.
