Infant schools are increasingly hard to find - closures and mergers mean their numbers have fallen by around 25 per cent in the past five years, according to a Tes analysis.

And now a proposal, which, on the face of it, seems to be only good news for six- and seven-year-olds, could result in infant schools being put further at risk, heads are warning.

They fear that around 88,000 Year 2 children in infant, or first, schools could still be expected to sit the tests that their primary school peers no longer have to take. And they believe that this “preposterous” and “ludicrous” development would threaten the very future of infant school.

The proposal to scrap testing of seven-year-olds was backed by 81 per cent of heads in a recent survey by the NAHT headteachers’ union on the government’s recommendations for rebooting primary assessment. But there are some who are furious that infant schools may still be expected to administer the tests.

“I think if parents thought their children were being tested, but down the road in an all-through primary normal life continued in Year 2, they are not going to pick our schools,” says Judy Shaw, head of Tuel Lane Infant School and Nursery in Sowerby Bridge, West Yorkshire.

And it is not just attracting parents that infant school heads are worried about.

“It is a ludicrous suggestion,” Kathryn Harper-Quinn, head of Hounslow Heath Infant and Nursery School in West London, says. “What about the impact on teachers? Would you teach in an infant school if you have to go through that workload?”

Alice Edgington, head of St Stephen’s Infant School in Canterbury, adds: “The suggestion that schools which are not all-through primaries should have to administer key stage 1 Sats, while all-through primaries do not, is absolutely preposterous and ridiculous.

“Infant schools are unique settings, where the building blocks of a child’s education are focused on wholly. We should be celebrating these schools rather than penalising them.”

The anomaly arises from the government’s attempt to reintroduce a baseline assessment that would judge children’s abilities at age 4. Outrage over the chaotic introduction of the new Sats last year prompted the recently closed consultation on another set of proposed changes to primary assessment.

But the government decided that, as well as addressing those immediate concerns, it would also take the opportunity “set direction for the long-term system of primary assessment”.

This long-term vision includes a baseline assessment in Reception year, which would then be used as a starting point for measuring children’s progress between starting school and Year 6. But in infant and first schools, which do not have a Year 6, key stage 1 tests could remain as accountability measures.

“The most logical measures for infant schools would be Reception to key stage 1,” the consultation says. “This would mean that these schools would be judged on a different basis from all-through primary schools and so would need to be compared against each other.”

But unions are concerned at the implication that this could result in KS1 Sats remaining for some - especially given the vulnerability of infant schools.

“It is inherently unfair to suggest that a minority of pupils, attending schools which are not all-through primaries, will be required to undertake additional statutory assessments at the end of key stage 1,” says the NAHT in its consultation response. “Such a decision may also have an impact on admissions, particularly to infant schools.”

Parents love ‘infanty’ schools

The NASUWT teaching union’s response points out: “If statutory key stage 1 assessment is discontinued for all-through primary schools, it would be entirely incongruous to retain it to accommodate a particular form of school organisation that comprises a relatively small and declining proportion of the primary sector.”

A Tes analysis of Department for Education data shows that there were 1,852 state-funded schools educating only children aged 7 or under in 2010, but by 2016 this number had dropped by 467 (25 per cent) to 1,385 schools.

Over the same period, the number of primary schools rose by 975 to 14,901, with some having been created by an amalgamation of infant and junior schools.

“There were seven infant schools in Calderdale when I arrived 12 years ago,” Shaw says. “Now there are four.”

She points out that mergers between infant and junior schools are always done under consultation, and can be positive. “There are three things that tend to trigger [mergers],” she says. “If the head of an infant or junior retires or moves on, that raises the question and maybe that should be explored. Another reason may be cost-cutting because the highest staffing cost [in a school] is the cost of a headteacher, and the other thing is if a school falls foul of Ofsted.

“But parents choose our infant school because it is lovely and very ‘infanty’. We have more freedom in the early years foundation stage curriculum to follow children’s interests and, as a headteacher, I can devote myself to early years.”

Barry Yeardsley, head of Lyndon Green Infant School in Birmingham, points out that while the creation of free schools was heralded as a way of increasing choice - infant schools also help to provide variety in the education system. “A number of governments have tried to champion choice under academies or free schools,” he says. “This is another choice. We have a passion for what we do. We focus on these year groups.

“We work closely with the junior school and share a caretaker and a school business manager - you don’t have to amalgamate in order to get best value. Infant schools are special places. And junior schools are special places, too.”