Education secretary Charles Clarke said he would introduce a trial from 2004 to embed Key Stage 1 tests in overall teachers' assessments, instead of publishing them separately, and let teachers decide when to test pupils.
But, outlining the Government's primary school document, Excellence and Enjoyment: A Strategy for Primary Schools, he rejected calls for the abolition of the tests. 'I refuse to return to a school system that fails its children through lack of public accountability and proper monitoring.
That is anathema to progress,' he said.
The Government's move was welcomed by Early Education. Pat Wills, its national chair, said, 'We feel they have listened to teachers and lobbyists, particularly about the Key Stage 1 SATs.' She added that Government ministers had been forced to acknowledge that teacher assessments had been 'so accurate that they are a much better indicator of children's progress than the testing' and wondered whether the Government would abolish SATs once the tests became such a minimal part of the teaching programme.
Doug McAvoy, leader of the National Union of Teachers, said Mr Clarke had 'taken a welcome first step in recognising the damaging and stifling effects of national curriculum tests and national targets on primary schools'. But he added, 'His proposals for the future, while welcome, do not go far enough.'
David Hart, general secretary of the National Association of Headteachers, said teacher assessment was 'the only proper route by which the achievement of seven-year-olds should be measured and reported'. However, he said, 'if teachers were given maximum flexibility to apply tests and tasks over time, as and when they see fit, in order to inform their overall assessment, then that might prove to be acceptable'.
NASUWTgeneral secretary Eamonn O'Kane regretted that the Government had not 'taken this opportunity to review the whole question of the schools performance figures, the league tables, whose existence has placed so many schools under unfair pressure'.