What is the point of SATs exams in year 6?

If a pupil does really well in their SATs exams maybe they get 95% their achievement means nothing because virtually all secondary schools do not segregate pupils in year 7 based on academic ability. So a pupil who gets 95% will be put into classes with those who might have got less than 5%, the unmotivated ones who don’t want to be in school and will mess about and slow down the lessons to their own ability.
So that pupil who got 95% put in immense effort only to end up in a class at the level of the lowest achievers. So what is the point of SATs?

What would be better is to give year 7 students their options in year 7 instead of year 10. Then they have a better chance of studying among students of their own ability. Let them drop pointless subjects and do ones of their own choosing.

What would be better is to give year 7 students their options in year 7 instead of year 10. Then they have a better chance of studying among students of their own ability. Let them drop pointless subjects and do ones of their own choosing.

Primary schools are judged by their SATs results. And where as you are right, secondaries do do their own testing, their Progress 8 and Attainment 8 scores are based on the value added they give to each pupil based on their SATs scores. High SATs scores are great for primaries but a headache for secondaries.

It is all part of the golden panacea in education which sees the whole sector striving to be above average!

Incidentally, given schools offer a broad curriculum which cover the basis of general knowledge, just exactly which subjects are pointless?

If a pupil is interested in sciences (maybe they want to be a doctor or engineer) then history, music and religious studies are irrelevant to them and they’d be better doing more physics, chemistry and biology.

If a pupil is interested in sciences (maybe they want to be a doctor or engineer) then history, music and religious studies are irrelevant to them and they’d be better doing more physics, chemistry and biology.

Other than to know what sets to put pupils in when they enter Year 7, I don’t see the point of sats (especially KS1 ones) and they ought to be scrapped.

It is true there isn't much point of KS1 sats. I suppose an advantage to KS2 sats, aside from being a way to set pupils in secondary, is that it can be the experience of a first 'big' exam to many students, especially those that didn't take the 11+. I personally wouldn't want the first big exam I did in school to be my GCSEs. It was nice knowing for my GCSEs that it wasn't the first time in my life I would be sitting in a big hall doing an exam that actually mattered. It is also good to get lots of exam practice in that regard to help learn how to deal with exam stress.

If a pupil does really well in their SATs exams maybe they get 95% their achievement means nothing because virtually all secondary schools do not segregate pupils in year 7 based on academic ability. So a pupil who gets 95% will be put into classes with those who might have got less than 5%, the unmotivated ones who don’t want to be in school and will mess about and slow down the lessons to their own ability.
So that pupil who got 95% put in immense effort only to end up in a class at the level of the lowest achievers. So what is the point of SATs?

What would be better is to give year 7 students their options in year 7 instead of year 10. Then they have a better chance of studying among students of their own ability. Let them drop pointless subjects and do ones of their own choosing.

I mean some schools and pupils didn't even do sats, so their first exams would have been GCSEs. Or even worse, take students who did their A-levels in 2022, most of that Cohort wouldn't have sat any GCSE exams and some of them might not have even sat sats meaning that their first exams would have been A-levels. I take your point though.

If a pupil is interested in sciences (maybe they want to be a doctor or engineer) then history, music and religious studies are irrelevant to them and they’d be better doing more physics, chemistry and biology.

Primary schools are judged by their SATs results. And where as you are right, secondaries do do their own testing, their Progress 8 and Attainment 8 scores are based on the value added they give to each pupil based on their SATs scores. High SATs scores are great for primaries but a headache for secondaries.

It is all part of the golden panacea in education which sees the whole sector striving to be above average!

Incidentally, given schools offer a broad curriculum which cover the basis of general knowledge, just exactly which subjects are pointless?

If a pupil is interested in sciences (maybe they want to be a doctor or engineer) then history, music and religious studies are irrelevant to them and they’d be better doing more physics, chemistry and biology.