As the government pushes for compulsory reading tests for 13-year-olds, educators and experts warn that further testing will not address the underlying literacy crisis. Michael Robinson, chair of governors at a large secondary school in a deprived area, notes that more than half of pupils start secondary school already behind despite existing national assessments. He argues that adding another test at age 13 will only pull staff away from teaching children to read.
Robinson calls for long-term, evidence-based transition programmes between primary and secondary schools, high-quality literacy training for secondary teachers, more reading specialists and librarians, and well-stocked libraries with time for reading for pleasure. He stresses that any new assessment should be diagnostic and formative, not merely an accountability tick-box.
Simon Gibbs, emeritus professor of inclusive educational psychology, cautions that 'weighing the pig does not make it fatter'. He warns that further tests may disenfranchise children from poor backgrounds and add to the overburdened special educational needs system. Instead, he advocates for attractive, well-stocked libraries where young people can find material that stimulates a thirst for learning.
Helen Elliott, a retired deputy head, questions the evidence that increased testing produces better outcomes. She highlights the importance of raising self-esteem and confidence through a curriculum rich in creativity and exploration, rather than succumbing to a 'test, test, test' philosophy.
Tristram Burden welcomes the move to abolish the two-child benefit cap but urges the government to restore Sure Start funding to 2010 levels and leave schools to focus on education. He emphasises the need for social infrastructure such as libraries, youth clubs, and spaces for children to foster a sense of belonging, arguing that these measures will have a greater impact than additional testing.
