A Cumbrian educator and trade unionist has spoken out against exams for young children which have been criticised nationally for being too hard.

Parents and teachers have called for exams for 10 and 11-year-olds to be scrapped after this year’s English paper left pupils ‘in tears’.

Dozens of parents shared concerns online about the Year 6 Sats on parenting forum Mumsnet, with one saying her daughter found it “really hard and awful”.

A Year 6 teacher said the reading paper was 'hideous' and 'much harder than last year’s', saying it was 'on par with the notoriously vile 2016 paper'.

Sats are used to measure children’s English and maths skills in Year 2 and Year 6 and consist of six 45-minute papers.

The Department for Education’s website states that Sats are meant to “measure school performance and to make sure individual pupils have the support that they need as they move into secondary school”.

However, Louise Atkinson, a former Carlisle City Council member, educator, and national president of the National Education Union, said the tests are functionally useless and do more harm than good.

She said: “My experience from being a mum, teacher, and governor, is that the amount of stress they put kids under is far too much.

“It’s not about checking their learning, it just restricts the curriculum to only focusing on topics that will get them through the test, it’s just pointless.

“The tests are so difficult, some of the language they use can be hit and miss if the kids haven’t got into contact with the word – ‘safari’ for example.

“This year it upset young people a lot, children were breaking down, and no one wants to put pressure on young people.

“Those that don’t do well will go to secondary school and be told they’ve not met the standard, which is just so much pressure.

“We need to review the entire assessment system; Sats cause problems for the whole curriculum all through the year.

“We need to be speaking to everybody involved and sharing ideas on how to fix them.

“We feel strongly as a union that the ‘benefits’ are negligible.

“There are better ways of assessing learning.”