SATs Results Delayed 2026: What Parents Need to Know

Year 6 parents across England spent an extra week this July waiting for a set of results that are normally in hand by early morning post. Pearson, the exam board now responsible for marking Key Stage 2 SATs, pushed its results day back nine days, from 7 July to 16 July, after the online platform it built for markers failed under the weight of this year's papers. For families used to a fixed date circled in the calendar since September, the delay landed with little warning and even less explanation at first.

What went wrong

This is the first year Pearson has run the SATs marking contract, having won the £180 million deal back from Capita, the company that managed it previously. Around 600,000 Year 6 pupils sit the tests each year, roughly 97.5 per cent of the cohort, in reading, maths and grammar, punctuation and spelling. Unlike GCSEs or A-levels, where much of the marking now runs through mature, well-tested digital systems, SATs papers still rely on external markers working through scripts largely by hand, checked and recorded through whatever platform the contractor provides.

According to Pearson's own account, two separate problems combined to slow things down. Markers found themselves locked out of certain questions on the new online marking platform, and a fault in how pupil data moved between Pearson's internal systems meant results could not be compiled and checked on schedule. The company had eighteen months to build and test its new systems before this year's tests; by its own admission, that preparation did not hold up under real conditions. Pearson has said its other exams, including GCSEs, A-levels and vocational qualifications, run on entirely separate systems and were unaffected.

Pearson raised marker pay by 20 per cent for any papers assessed after 3 June, in an apparent effort to recruit enough people to catch up on the backlog. This was not a case of results arriving a day or an hour late. Pearson missed its date by more than a week, a gap large enough that Ofqual, the exams regulator, felt compelled to intervene publicly rather than leave the matter to the company alone.

How officials responded

Ofqual called the situation "deeply disappointing" and said it understood the delay would be "frustrating for schools, parents and pupils". Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said Pearson had "rightly taken full responsibility for the delay and apologised to schools and families", while a Pearson spokesperson said the company was "sorry that this year's results have not been delivered to the original timetable" and apologised "unreservedly for the disruption caused".

Not everyone found the apology reassuring. NAHT general secretary Paul Whiteman described the delay as "completely unacceptable", adding that it was "totally unfair" to land the problem on schools at the last minute, many of which build their end-of-year plans, from setting classes for September to briefing secondary schools about incoming pupils, around results day. Darren Northcott of the NASUWT went further, calling for SATs marking to sit "within the public sector" rather than be run by a private contractor at all. Whether that argument gains any traction will likely depend on how Pearson performs next year, once the platform has had a full cycle to be fixed.

The disruption also lands in a year when other parts of the assessment system are under strain. Staff at AQA, the country's largest exam board, have been striking over pay, with unions warning of possible delays to this summer's GCSE and A-level results too. None of that is connected to Pearson's SATs contract, but it adds to a summer in which the machinery behind England's exam system has looked less dependable than usual.

There is a knock-on effect for secondary schools too. Many use incoming Year 6 data, alongside teacher assessment, to help decide which classes and sets a child joins in September. With SATs results landing over a week later than planned, and closer to the summer holidays, some secondaries will have had to build their initial Year 7 groupings on teacher recommendations alone, adjusting once the official figures arrive. For most children this makes little practical difference, since sets are rarely fixed for good, but it is one more reason schools were frustrated by the timing.

What it means if your child is affected

Results are now due by 16 July. If you believe your child's marks contain an error, either a genuine marking mistake or a clerical slip, the school can apply for a review on your behalf. That review checks that a script was marked and totalled correctly against the mark scheme. It does not amount to a fresh remark of your child's answers, or a chance to argue for a different interpretation of borderline work.

Normally, the review window closes ten days after results are published, which this year would have meant a deadline of 17 July, right at the start of the summer holidays. Following feedback from schools about how unworkable that timetable would be, the Standards and Testing Agency extended the deadline for review applications all the way to 7 September, well into the new school year. The STA said the change was designed "to allow review applications to take place after schools return from the holidays", and has promised updated guidance on when schools can expect to hear back with the outcome of any review they submit.

In practice, that means if your child's results look surprising, or don't match what their teacher has told you across the year, there's no need to rush a decision over the summer. Speak to the school before the end of term if you can, so a review request is ready to go as soon as term restarts in September, but the pressure to act within days of receiving the letter has gone.

A test of trust in a new contract

SATs exist to give parents, teachers and secondary schools a consistent, comparable measure of where a child stands at the end of primary school. The results feed into setting decisions, into transition conversations with secondary schools, and into how confident a family feels heading into Year 7. A nine-day delay on its own is recoverable. What matters more over time is whether Pearson's first year running the contract turns out to be teething trouble on a new system, or an early sign of something less reliable. Both Ofqual and the STA will be watching next year's marking cycle closely, and Pearson will be under real pressure to show its platform can cope before then.

For now, the practical advice for parents is straightforward. Ask the school when your delayed results are expected, and remember that the appeals window stays open until September if anything looks amiss. If a lower than expected SATs score adds to the usual summer nerves about starting secondary school, it's rarely the result itself that needs fixing, but confidence in a particular area, maths word problems or reading comprehension, say. That's something a few sessions with a tutor over the holidays, of the kind Blue Tutors arranges with Oxbridge graduate tutors, can address well before the school gates reopen in September.