The National Education Union (NEU) has surveyed 970 reception teacher members for their views on Reception Baseline Assessment (RBA), including on the recent change to digitise the test. Their views are startlingly clear – the RBA is inaccurate, a waste of resources and does not support the best start in life for children.
- Over 80 per cent of surveyed reception teachers disagreed that the reception baseline assessment provides accurate information about a child’s abilities. Over 90 per cent agreed that the RBA was not as useful as teacher observation-based assessments.
- 5 per cent of teachers said RBA was a good experience for children. 85 per cent disagreed that the test is appropriate for children with SEND.
- 88 per cent of reception teachers surveyed said the reception baseline should not continue in any format.
Whilst the early years were not part of the curriculum and assessment review, the reception baseline takes place in the first six weeks of primary school. The profession’s concerns around RBA cannot be ignored by government as the findings of the CAR are taken forward.
RBA doesn’t help schools or families
4 per cent of reception teachers said the RBA is important for parents and families. Over 80 per cent disagreed that the test provides accurate information about a child’s abilities.
Over 90 per cent agreed that the RBA was not as useful as teacher observation-based assessments. 85 per cent disagreed that RBA is a good way of measuring school progress, with 57 per cent ‘strongly’ disagreeing.
88 per cent of reception teachers surveyed said the reception baseline should not continue in any format.
Respondents said:
“I have been teaching for 13 years. This is my first time in Reception. I was flabbergasted by the time taken to administer a test to four-year-olds. It told me nothing helpful for their development.”
“A complete load of rubbish - some of the questions are designed to fail the children.”
“It was a very stressful experience that made the first few weeks of a stressful time in school way worse. I am dreading next year.”
RBA is a waste of school time and resources
Almost 95 per cent of respondents disagreed that RBA is a good use of staff time and school resources. 93 per cent said that administering the test increases workload.
96 per cent said that the time could be better used to settle children into school.
Respondents said:
“The RBA is a complete and utter waste of my time. Instead of building relationships with the new children in my class, I’m sat down the corridor in the library, battling with the clunky iPad and DfE website calling children 1 at a time to complete a useless assessment […] It’s laborious, time consuming and repetitive. It needs to go, we’ve all had enough!”
“Total waste of time! I’ve had to administer the test in the classroom whilst the other children play as I do not have any staff to allow me to get out of the room to do it! It has taken us 6 weeks to get through 40 kids! The questions were ridiculous as are the statements it gives about the children.”
It isn’t good for children
Less than 5 per cent of teachers said RBA was a good experience for children. 66 per cent agreed that the increase in screentime wasn’t good for their classes. 85 per cent disagreed that the test is appropriate for children with SEND.
Staff work tirelessly to mitigate the impact of the test on their classes but two thirds said the test negatively impacts wellbeing and developing relationships.
Respondents said:
“Awful for SEND pupils. Constant disconnecting of devices means they lose focus and aren't interested. Completely pointless experience for my whole SEND cohort and all were discontinued [...] I gained no useful information from the experience.”
“It wasn’t a positive experience for the children, who often found it confusing or disengaging. Overall, I don’t feel it gave an accurate picture of their abilities.”
Digitisation has been a disaster
Two thirds of respondents (67 per cent) agreed that that the assessment hasn’t improved by becoming digitised, with 46 per cent ‘strongly’ agreeing with that view.
Over three quarters of respondents (76 per cent) disagreed that using digital devices has improved workload. A large majority (84 per cent) said that they had experienced problems administering the test, with 59 per cent ‘strongly’ agreeing.
“The digital RBA was a total shambles. It constantly crashed and I wasted loads of valuable time.”
“Assessments kept crashing and losing connections. One assessment had to reconnect 11 times! Absolute waste of my time. Our children missed out on important first few weeks learning to use resources, make relationships and settle into school.”
Commenting on the findings, Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said:
“The reception baseline assessment is one of the clearest indicators that the government is more concerned with data and accountability than children’s learning and wellbeing.
“There are no benefits of this test for children, families and educators. This awful assessment is incompatible with the Best Start In Life agenda and does not have any buy in from the profession.
“Digitising the test has been a disaster and appalling squander of resources as education funding is being cut to the bone. It is also a complete misread of the room at a time where parents and educators are increasingly concerned about screentime. The solution is very clear - baseline cannot continue in any format.”
Beatrice Merrick, Chief Executive of Early Education, commented:
“This new data from NEU demonstrates the need for the Reception Baseline Assessment to be scrapped. It makes no sense for Reception teachers to be spending time and energy completing this pointless assessment for one arm of DfE, when the rest of the department is focused on boosting the quality of teaching in reception to give every child the best start in life. Teachers need to be focused on supporting good transitions into Reception and ensuring children are settled, flourishing and able to fulfil their potential. There is no good reason for government to retain this meaningless measure.”
A spokesperson for campaign group More Than A Score added:
"It's time the government listened to the voices of those who know young children the best. Reception teachers, school leaders and education experts have always known that testing four-year-olds was going to be a pointless exercise. Now, unreliable data is being collected via unreliable technology and even more valuable settling-in time is being wasted.
"The unsuitability of the test for children with SEND is particularly worrying. The children who need most support are already being ignored by the system within the first few weeks of starting school.
"Meanwhile, we are still waiting for the Department for Education to explain how the results of a 20-minute test taken at the age of four will be compared to four days of SATs taken at the age of 11 as a reliable measure of progress."
Editor’s Note:
The NEU survey of 970 reception teacher members was conducted in October 2025. The survey was carried out online.
