The SAT key stage 3 system recently imploded in a spectacular fashion taking the hopes of 1.2m children with it. Despite effective teaching resources, Britain paid £156m to contractor ETS to handle the marking of key stage 3 SAT’s over a five year period. The initial shock from the amount of the fee was quickly followed by fury that the exam marking process had failed, the contractor sacked and a partial refund demanded.

And now the fight. Understandably due to the size of the contract ETS has lodged a counter claim. They say that the National Assessment Agency ( NAA), a division of The Qualification Agency (QCA), withheld information, delayed decisions and changed the terms of the contract.

You couldn’t write the script! But more importantly we have government departments that seem either remote or so aloof of the facts they appear to fly in the face of common sense and the views of the professionals involved. How can a body such as of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) be completely ignored? This august body has the brief to develop policies, proposals, ideals and solutions based on years of hands on experience. They identified a solution to the current crisis five years ago. And appear ignored.

The ASCL stated that SAT’s can only be a fair judgment of a child’s ability if this were assessed over the whole syllabus. The ASCL deemed a wide range of questions and activities more relevant than a short test. It would also overcome the “Teach to Test” syndrome that has infiltrated the teaching role to “big up” the results – on which teachers and schools are judged. The ASCL concept introduced the role of Chartered Assessor, drawn from experienced teachers externally accredited in a similar way as other chartered professionals. A child’s performance would be based on the accumulation of marks over long period rather than a single test. The assessors would control, advise, review and measure the performance of school grade through liaison with the school at ages 7, 11 and 14 years old.

These assessments would be more accurate, providing a fairer outcome for the students who applied themselves over the whole course. This approach is modelled on universities’ assessment of degrees. The system could be introduced at Key Stage 3, key stage 4 SAT’s. It could be extended to handle GCSE’s where secondary schools currently spend £700m per annum on examinations. The ASCL believe this could be halved through the new approach. But there would be a further benefit; the chartered status would give teachers a qualification to aspire to. A chartered assessor (Teacher) would gain professional recognition as a just as a chartered engineer or accountant. An authoritative voice from a recognized professional able to advice the system and also provide a career progression that might help stem the flow of experienced teachers leaving the job. This new career path would offer an additional route to seniority rather than the Head teacher role that many are unwillingly to take.

The scheme would introduce a practical solution for child and school. It would also overcome the sometimes crass judgements made by government departments who maybe a little too remote from the coal face.

Perhaps the Schools Secretary position in the cabinet should only be appointed from a “time served teacher.” All too often this vital position is occupied by a minister with 18 months tenancy in a role with implications over the lifetime of a child.

In the meantime the new academic year kicks off with a new key stage 3 syllabus, changes to GCSE’s, “A” levels and the introduction of 14 to 19 diplomas. Some say this will induce a meltdown caused by too much happening all at once. Be afraid, be very afraid!

Alistair Owens is not a teacher but believes that teachers are largely ignored in developing the solutions to many of the problems that beset our educational system. He writes regularly for a teaching resources website