Proposal to reform Leaving Cert grading

I suggest that people consider that a working group of "stake holders" would have considered this at length. Describing them as "goons" and those who implement their proposals as "fools" without having read the report is brainless, IMO.

chatterboxxx95 wrote: »

Would definately agree this could cause problems. Most students score low b's and c's, even high d's. We're talking about condensing roughly 4 different grades into 2. I don't think its fair for an exam such as the leaving cert. There's a big difference between scraping 50 or getting 59, narrowly nissing 60.

Also how would this effect CAO points. Either the average will go up or down, depending how they decide to award then to new grades. If the points for a new proposed H2 is 90, as is currently for an A1 , then points for courses are going up, some of which are already very high. If points were 85 instead, your narrowing the pool for those applying for the likes of medicine, vetinary and dentistry where every point matters. They would be putting a huge gulf between the 600/625 students and those doing a brilliant LC but not attaining top grades in everything.

I seriously question the logic of whoever decided this could be an option. I mean, why fix what's not broken. I've heard people complaining about the fairness of the leaving cert, the pressure, 6/7 subjects, rote learning, having to wait a full year to repeat etc. Never once have I heard "the exam is fine, we just newd to change the grade borders and rename the grades " -_- The government will be the bigger fools of they decide to implement this. A big waste of time and effort, in my opinion, when they could be doing something useful.

It's possible (even likely) that the points structure will change - because, if H1=100 points, H2=90 points, etc, then H6 (ie 40-49%)=50 points, meaning the penalty for failing to Pass reaches ludicrous proportions. Yes, the points-average would go up in the debut year, but a once-off rebalancing of the average wouldn't matter. It's even possible that the points system could be done away with. Other than that the average would go up, I don't think it's possible to derive from publically-available points-data what the effect of the change would be on overall scores.


It should be recognised that the Irish fourteen-band scale is unusual when compared internationally. In England/Wales/NI, where only three subjects are usually counted (therefore, making each grade twice as significant), A*, A, and B usually accounts for the top 65%+; the IB-Diploma has a scale of 1-7.

I do have similar concerns to the ones voiced about each grade covering double the percentage, and a small number of students every year would inevitably be outscored by others with a lower cumulative percentage. However, the proposed LC-grading structure must be seen in the context of the coming changes to the university admissions system - that system is certainly broken, and LC-grading forms part of that. There will be two main reforms: a) substantial reduction in number of courses: it's not yet clear what the intention is, but there is a possibility that, rather than applying to English or Physics, students would apply Arts/Humanities or Science - were that to occur, fluctuation in points would almost cease; and, b) an admissions system that considers multiple criteria, rather than just points - in light of that, whether one got an H3 or an H4 in one subject becomes much less important.

SChique00 wrote: »

Completely agree, but we've come to expect this from Ruardhí and his band of goons - sure look at the debacle they've created over the new "improved" Junior Cert. They're focusing in on the minutiae of the system rather than tackling the glaring problems (the excruciating pressure, too broad a spectrum of subjects to juggle, the woeful compulsory nature of Irish, et. al) Let's just be thankful it won't affect us.

Above is a rather dim post. First, Ruari Quinn wasn't a member of the group that proposed this (which included representatives of the universities), secondly, JC-reform is hardly focusing on the "minutiae", and thirdly this proposal is part of the plans to reduce exam-pressure/rote-learning/etc! What the poster says about "too broad a spectrum of subjects" isn't a belief shared by most (though, as it happens, I'm probably one of them!).

Ompala wrote: »

This seems similar to the way the grading scheme is in Germany.
So first sign Germany is taking over the place, whoop.

According to Wikipedia, Germany's Abitur has a 15-point scale. Therefore, we're leaving it behind.

Ompala wrote: »

Was that pun on purpose or ?
And yeah, I never paid that much attention in german class, just remember something about 1 2 etc in grades

No it wasn't! But, I would contend that a pun, by definition, must be intentional. Therefore, t'was not a pun!

These are two Opinion pieces from the papers: Helping schools to reclaim their purpose | Irish Times and It's not perfect, but this grading scale is a huge improvement on old system | Irish Independent.

Edit: this is the report following a consultation with teachers concerning "Grading and Marking Practices", published in November, 2013.

Manutd_4life wrote: »

So would u say this new grade system is better than the current one or could be worse.

I don't think it's possible to say until we know what the admissions process to third-level will be. Also, there may be unintended consequences - remember that the current grade-scale was introduced to try to correct a negative consequence of the scale that the LC will now revert to. I think, on balance, it's probable better, but that a fairer way than the lottery should be used for selecting students with the same score (especially if the number of such situations increases).