Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Dramatic fall in number failing maths

2

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Why? I think you're getting a little hung up on specific grades. Besides, the number of students earning an A1 should be relatively low.

    Let's compare it to the change in A1s in other subjects:

    English: 3.9% (2010), 4.3% (2011), 4.1% (2012
    Irish: 4.8%, 5.7%, 7.3%
    Geography: 3.1%, 3.0%, 3.4%
    History: 6.4%, 5.8%, 6.3%
    Maths: 7.5%, 5.9%, 4.2% (I adjusted this last figure up from it's actual value of 3.1% to allow for the large number of extra pupils sitting it this year who are most likely swelling the lower grades)

    So in all of the other subjects we have the numbers getting A1s remaining stable (or rising considerably in the case of Irish) but in Maths we have a large drop.

    I'm curious as to why that is and is it an indicator that the schools are not catering toward students who have a very high aptitude for maths.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭K_1


    This years paper 2 had no choice, which may have made the a1 grade less achievable for some students.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Let's compare it to the change in A1s in other subjects...
    Well, there isn’t really any point comparing it to other subjects, as it’s essentially been established that maths is a special case. Hence the bonus points.
    So in all of the other subjects we have the numbers getting A1s remaining stable (or rising considerably in the case of Irish) but in Maths we have a large drop.
    Which is ironic really, considering the cries of “grade inflation” we’ve heard over the last number of years.
    I'm curious as to why that is and is it an indicator that the schools are not catering toward students who have a very high aptitude for maths.
    Maybe. Or maybe the papers are getting tougher? Or at least, getting an A1 is getting tougher? That’s not a bad thing – helps to separate the good from the excellent.

    At the end of the day, grades are somewhat subjective, albeit less so in maths relative to other subjects, and they’re not really an indicator of teaching standards and/or student ability in and of themselves. As I’ve said a few times now, I’m personally just pleased to see more kids attempting the honours paper. Hopefully it continues.

    Incidentally, there has been a rise in the numbers of kids taking maths and science subjects for A-levels here in the UK too, although initiatives have been in place for a few years now to assist teachers teaching those subjects.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,971 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Grades in Maths are not subjective. The vast majority o the paper requires correct answers. Even opinions in paper 3 have to be backed up by sound mathematical reasoning


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    doc_17 wrote: »
    Grades in Maths are not subjective.
    Are the grades not dependent on the marking scheme?
    doc_17 wrote: »
    The vast majority o the paper requires correct answers.
    That's not true - one could get the answer to every single question wrong, but still emerge with a good grade.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,885 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I hear that they're going reviewing the 25 points already. I mean if you think about it it's a bit farcical that students who are competing for things like Law, Medicine and Dentistry which all require ordinary level maths, if at all basically must do honours maths since the competition is so fierce to get in. Totally unfair in my opinion. The 3rd level institutes or some body should go through the college courses and specify the ones that actually require mathematical ability e.g. Engineering, Science, Economics, Computer Science.

    I don't think it's a bad thing that the maths ability of our college students/graduates should be higher on average after this change. The maths on the HL course is not exactly mind boggling, and it's probably right that more technical students are getting onto these courses, than non technical students.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    astrofool wrote: »
    I don't think it's a bad thing that the maths ability of our college students/graduates should be higher on average after this change. The maths on the HL course is not exactly mind boggling, and it's probably right that more technical students are getting onto these courses, than non technical students.

    Would it not make more sense to award bonus points for Chemistry and Biology for Medicine and Dentistry? Chemistry especially is a technical subject and will be a lot more useful to these students over the course of their studies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Would it not make more sense to award bonus points for Chemistry and Biology for Medicine and Dentistry?
    There have been suggestions that the bonus points scheme may be expanded to include other subjects.


  • Registered Users Posts: 568 ✭✭✭Dapics


    The examiners were told to go "soft" on marking them.
    Basically Politics is now interfering with our education system.
    It would look bad if the governments new pet project didn't do well eh?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Dapics wrote: »
    The examiners were told to go "soft" on marking them.
    And yet the number of A1's awarded dropped?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭Head The Wall


    In relation to A1's Yes but the thread is about the number of people failing maths. I also believe it has something to do with them making them easier


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,323 ✭✭✭Cruel Sun


    djpbarry wrote: »
    And yet the number of A1's awarded dropped?

    They manipulated the marking scheme so that more people would pass the subject and project maths would be considered a success.

    People are no better than they were at maths before, the new course is an unorganized joke which has wasted a lot of money.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭Head The Wall


    And pigs learn to fly in one year :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 302 ✭✭RubyRoss


    I seem to remember complaints last year about how difficult the maths paper was which some believed was an effort to make this year's project maths results appear successful in comparison.

    I downloaded the project maths paper and found it pretty simple for higher-level. Lots of statistics and propability. Maybe the other paper was more difficult.

    On paper it's a good sign that more students are doing maths just as it is a good sign on paper that we have so many third level graduates. In reality, it's entirely self-defeating if the standard of work isn't high.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭sock puppet


    Cruel Sun wrote: »

    People are no better than they were at maths before, the new course is an unorganized joke which has wasted a lot of money.

    If we assume that the exam and marking scheme are as difficult as last year it still doesn't follow that results should be the same, as the previous year's best ordinary level students would have sat higher level this year.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,971 ✭✭✭doc_17


    djpbarry wrote: »
    doc_17 wrote: »
    Grades in Maths are not subjective.
    Are the grades not dependent on the marking scheme?
    doc_17 wrote: »
    The vast majority o the paper requires correct answers.
    That's not true - one could get the answer to every single question wrong, but still emerge with a good grade.

    Ye they are dependent on the scheme but surely you understand that the scheme is base on correct strategies and answers?

    As for your second point you can only get good grades with mathematically valid attempts and answers. I take you point though about not needing correct answers to get marks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Dapics wrote: »
    The examiners were told to go "soft" on marking them.
    Basically Politics is now interfering with our education system.
    It would look bad if the governments new pet project didn't do well eh?
    Source?

    Because if you don't even have a source for this, let alone proof, you are just some guy making baseless accusations on an internet forum, and can't really expect anyone to lend this any credibility.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,372 Mod ✭✭✭✭andrew


    Here's a link to a short analysis of the change done by a guy I know. It seems that the change only benefits a small number of people who would've done HL maths anyway


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    In relation to A1's Yes but the thread is about the number of people failing maths. I also believe it has something to do with them making them easier
    Do you have anything to support this belief or is it just an assumption? The absolute number of failures at higher level hasn’t actually changed all that much.
    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    They manipulated the marking scheme so that more people would pass the subject and project maths would be considered a success.
    See above – roughly the same number of people failed the exam as last year. What’s more, the total number of failures across all levels is still pretty high. If there was some covert initiative to ensure as many passes in maths as possible, it was an epic failure (no pun intended).
    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    People are no better than they were at maths before...
    People are not born with innate mathematical ability. Becoming mathematically literate requires a lot of hard work – it is essentially no different to learning a foreign language, in my opinion. The simplest explanation for the observed increase in honours awarded in maths is an increase in the work put in by students. This makes sense in the current economic climate – getting any kind of degree and then walking into the jobs market to make shed loads of money was a possibility 5-10 years ago, but not anymore. In these more competitive times, being mathematically literate confers a big advantage.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,323 ✭✭✭Cruel Sun


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Do you have anything to support this belief or is it just an assumption? The absolute number of failures at higher level hasn’t actually changed all that much.

    I don't have any links to anything if that is what you mean, but I have classmates who were almost certain they had failed. They said themselves that they answered questions poorly and left some questions unanswered. I know one person after reviewing the paper, came to the conclusion that there was no way he'd have passed. However he got his D3 on results day. He was not the only one who got a pleasant surprise.

    djpbarry wrote: »
    See above – roughly the same number of people failed the exam as last year.

    The numbers stayed the same, but failure levels have fallen by 20%, you said it yourself in your initial post.

    I don't know if you are familiar with the new course (project maths), but it has come under a lot criticism. Schools weren't given enough information about the new paper 2, not many official sample papers were given out. I believe that a lot of people performed quite poorly in the exam and the marking scheme was manipulated so that record numbers would not fail.

    You do realize that when exams are being corrected that a draft marking scheme is applied to a random sample of scripts. The marking schemes are finalized and often adjusted after the random sampling.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    The government are making some good decisions though.

    They are looking at trialling jump Math which is worth looking up which would be a big change to the way Math is taught in our schools in fairness and probably for the better if the existing results of the courses students are to be believed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    I don't have any links to anything if that is what you mean, but I have classmates who were almost certain they had failed.
    So you know a few people who thought they failed, but emerged with a D, and now you think there’s a big conspiracy?
    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    The numbers stayed the same, but failure levels have fallen by 20%, you said it yourself in your initial post.
    Failure rates have fallen because the number of people sitting the exam increased dramatically. It is not unreasonable to assume that a lot of people who passed the higher paper this year would have sat the ordinary level paper in previous years.
    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    I don't know if you are familiar with the new course (project maths), but it has come under a lot criticism.
    It has come under some criticism, as any new syllabus inevitably will. However, I am very much under the impression that the move to modernise how maths is taught in Ireland has been broadly welcomed.
    Cruel Sun wrote: »
    You do realize that when exams are being corrected that a draft marking scheme is applied to a random sample of scripts. The marking schemes are finalized and often adjusted after the random sampling.
    I’ve already said that marking schemes are somewhat subjective by nature? If a draft marking scheme resulted in an abnormally high number of A1s, would you not expect it to be revised?

    Your argument for grade manipulation essentially boils down to your opinion that grade manipulation has taken place and you’re know seeking evidence to support this preconception. A few students performing better than they thought they did is not exactly Earth-shattering and if this is the sum total of your evidence, I would be inclined to dismiss your argument.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Doesn’t that kind of contradict your argument? Why would the maths paper suddenly become more difficult if high grades are the aim?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Once again, the reaction that I have read has been decidedly mixed.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that the average grade obtained in leaving cert maths has declined in tandem with Ireland’s PISA and OECD ranking?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Gauging reactions in a comparative manner is an impossible task.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Consider the declining number of students sitting the higher level maths exam, I find it hard to accept that the average leaving cert student in 2011 emerged with a significantly better maths grade than the average student in, say, 2000.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    But the article you linked to refers exclusively to higher level grades? As I said above, if fewer students are sitting higher level maths, then it's not terribly surprising that the mathematical ability of the average student is on the decline. If we were also to assume that it is the weaker students who are opting out of the higher paper - not an altogether unreasonable assumption - then it's not surprising that the average grade awarded on the higher paper has increased (slightly).

    I've said before on this site that I'm somewhat sceptical of claims relating to "grade inflation". In my opinion, the apparent improved performance of students in the LC, over the last decade in particular, has far more to do with student choices than the dumbing down of examinations (although I'm not rulling it out completely).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users Posts: 338 ✭✭itzme


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    My own belief is that while it is likely there is some grade inflation in third level (and second level) it is actually at the pass rate not the first class honours rate.
    In third level, colleges are paid by the department for every student they have registered in the semester there is a economic need to pass people who were on the border line or not. They are increasing the grades of those who should fail to make sure they get enough cash for the next year.

    On people getting better grades, you seem to be taking only one item into your consideration and drawing conclusions from it. There definitely is something wrong with the system and that is changes are being driven by people outside of education without an appreciation for how to and the difficulties of educating. What else has changed since 1992, well there has been a massive push to structured examinations at second level and especially at third level. There is immense pressure for each exam to be 4 questions, choose 3, a,b,c,d where d is always the hardest. The syllabus is also being structured so that question 1 always covers a certain part of the syllabus, question 2 another and so on. This allows for students to be much more strategic in what they study and with past exam papers makes getting a high grade much easier. This is my view on why in some cases there has increased grades, particularly in third level. This is being driven by a metrics based education system where we can "evaluate" the educators. It is seriously damaging our education system.

    On grade inflation and maths though it is worth pointing out the actual figures since 2009 which don't seem to show grade inflation in A's to me

    2009
    A1: 6.9%
    A2: 8.1%
    Total: 15%

    2010
    A1: 7.5%
    A2: 7.0%
    Total: 14.5%

    2011
    A1: 5.7%
    A2: 7.5%
    Total: 12.5%

    2012
    A1: 4.1%
    A2: 6.2%
    Total: 10.3%
    (sources: here and here)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 338 ✭✭itzme


    I'd also point out that while the Irish education system is getting one hell of a battering here in Ireland (by vested interests who want to turn it into a production line for graduates for their companies, or by people who believe teachers are doing a terrible job and believe that constantly testing the students will allow them to find the bad teachers and kick them out), the perception abroad is very positive.
    In 2009 we were ranked highest out of all surveyed countries in terms of recruiter perception of the quality of our graduates here. So we have some CEOs saying we're churning out crap, we have in independent reviews saying we're churning out high quality.....
    On PISA its worth reading this alternative view showing how all stats are not created equal. Now, if you believe the article then you have to ask why those conducting the PISA tests were not more diligent here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Come on now – you’re picking two isolated figures and drawing conclusions. Would I be right in guessing that 43% is an all-time high and 21% a relative low? What happens when C grades are also included? Or when only A grades are considered?

    What does the overall trend look like over that period? And how does it compare with changes in the number of students sitting the exam?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I was not aware of a dramatic increase – what discipline(s) are you referring to?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Would it not be more accurate to refer to it as points inflation? Would it also not be fair to say (and I am sure an examination of the records will show this to be the case) that the average student in 2007 opted for “easier” subjects, with a view to maximising their points tally, relative to the average student in 1992?
    Permabear wrote: »
    So, within the space of ten years, we went from 30 percent of Trinity graduates getting Firsts or 2:1's to 66 percent getting Firsts or 2:1's.

    I guess this doesn't count as grade inflation, though, right?
    Only if you’re of the opinion that all degrees are equal. A reasonable person would argue that there is a world of difference between obtaining a first in maths and obtaining a first in health and safety.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    The fall in the number of students taking higher level maths and other science subjects?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I’m sure they would have, but maths and science subjects would have been required to go and study engineering and science at third level, for example.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Large increase in number of students attending third level. Dramatic decrease in enrolments for courses such as science and engineering.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,447 ✭✭✭BrianD3


    Although I can't provide a link or any evidence for this it would be my opinion that school kids are now more competitive and informed than they were in the past. The internet has a lot to do with this and society has changed considerably since, say, 1992.

    I did my LC in the mid nineties - if I had had today's internet then I believe I would have achieved higher grades even with the same marking schemes, papers, teachers etc.

    Parents are also more competitive and educated than they were in the past. When I did my LC very few of my classmates' parents were educated to third level. Very few paid for grinds for their children even when the quality of the teaching was poor. IMO the proportion of parents educated to third level (and showing an interest in their child's education as a result) is likely to be higher now.

    Therefore I think there are other factors other than "grade inflation" and "dumbing down" here.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 98 ✭✭Rynox45


    I sat ordinary level maths, simply because I'm lazy and hadn't put in the work necessary in 4th year to continue with higher (The 25 points was announced just as I was dropping) and in my opinion, ordinary level leaving cert was easier than higher level Junior cert, it's a joke.
    I put in very little work, only doing a few sums in class in between chatting to a friend of mine and got an A2. Maths is my only ordinary level subject so I knew I wouldn't be counting it for points.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    But you're not comparing like with like.

    The points requirement is a function of supply and demand. There's nothing wrong with demand for certain courses changing as the economy changes and students perceive some courses to vacillate in terms of economic value.
    On the other side, it can be distorted by courses with small supply, like Philosophy or drama in TCD which had a very small class size relative to, say, Engineering or Computer Science with their greater availability of places. I seem to remember that a few years ago, TCD were accused of artificially stunting the Philosophy class in order to keep points artificially elevated.

    You're picking completely arbitrary examples out of thin air, comparing small classes with large classes willy nilly.

    Why are you doing that?

    To go back to grade inflation, Andrew posted a link earlier which suggests that greater specialisation may lead to greater average points allocation; the more that students can choose their course of study beyond the few, basic courses that were available 20 years ago, the more they can tap into their personal interests.

    I am not saying that grade inflation does not exist, but that this has to be taken into account. I'd be pretty sceptical of someone coming on here with dogmatic opinions, refusing to accept other quite legitimate explanations for changes in grade patterns. Obviously, as choice increases, one would expect results to improve in terms of aggregate scores (points).

    15dphuh.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Let's have a look at the raw numbers, shall we? Here are the percentages of students awarded various grades in higher level maths over the last 10 years (taken from examinations.ie):

    Year|Students|A (%)|B (%)|C (%)|D (%)|Fail (%)
    2002|9430|13.2|28.3|33.5|20.7|4.4
    2003|9453|13.3|30.1|32.9|19.5|4.2
    2004|9426|16.2|29.9|31.2|18.4|4.2
    2005|9843|15.5|31.9|30.7|17.7|4.2
    2006|9018|14.4|34.7|33.4|14.5|3.2
    2007|8388|15.6|33.7|31.0|15.9|3.8
    2008|8510|14.6|30.7|32.9|17.5|4.4
    2009|8420|15.0|33.1|32.5|16.0|3.2
    2010|8390|14.5|29.1|34.3|18.4|3.6
    2011|8235|13.4|33.9|33.6|16.0|3.0


    There is no discernable trend in the percentage of A grades awarded. You could possibly argue there has been a slight increase in the number of B and C grades awarded at the expense of D grades and fails, but it should be noted that there has been a large decrease in the number of students sitting the exam over this period. It’s not unreasonable to consider that this decrease may be a result of weaker students opting for the ordinary level paper.

    All in all, compelling evidence for significant grade inflation it does not make.


  • Registered Users Posts: 338 ✭✭itzme


    itzme wrote: »
    My own belief is that while it is likely there is some grade inflation in third level (and second level) it is actually at the pass rate not the first class honours rate.
    In third level, colleges are paid by the department for every student they have registered in the semester there is a economic need to pass people who were on the border line or not. They are increasing the grades of those who should fail to make sure they get enough cash for the next year.

    On people getting better grades, you seem to be taking only one item into your consideration and drawing conclusions from it. There definitely is something wrong with the system and that is changes are being driven by people outside of education without an appreciation for how to and the difficulties of educating. What else has changed since 1992, well there has been a massive push to structured examinations at second level and especially at third level. There is immense pressure for each exam to be 4 questions, choose 3, a,b,c,d where d is always the hardest. The syllabus is also being structured so that question 1 always covers a certain part of the syllabus, question 2 another and so on. This allows for students to be much more strategic in what they study and with past exam papers makes getting a high grade much easier. This is my view on why in some cases there has increased grades, particularly in third level. This is being driven by a metrics based education system where we can "evaluate" the educators. It is seriously damaging our education system.
    Any opinions on this permabear, you seem to be putting all your faith in simple percentages and not taking any time to look at the actual system that generates them and what has changed in it since 1992. The two things that have changed are the way exams are structured and the students ability to do well at these exams. If you make exams more formulaic, and we have, then it is easier to do well at them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,971 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    That is a disgraceful comment. Do you have evidence that this is the case? Are you accusing the teachers of awarding marks when none were merited?

    And I see you also you the opportunity (although I don't think anyone was talking about it) to get in a few digs about wages and hours which has nothing to do with this thread.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭rumour


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Excellent post. I did my leaving cert in the 80's which is a long time ago for many here. The paper was difficult but not as difficult as the papers from the 50's. I'd challenge todays leaving cert students to try those

    If we are below average by international standards then simply we are not good at Maths. Surely that simple concept should not be distorted.

    Mathematics is one of the purist and exact forms of communication available. I think(personal opinion) its an anathema to the majority in Ireland who revel in the cultural ability to distort or even ignore a logical conclusion. Definitely not something to be introduced into the main stream of favor in administrative Ireland.

    No one really wants to comprehend three/four things in motion having a definitive intersection. That would just be a conspiracy. However as you point out when you have pressure on the government on the one hand to deliver results and from the unions and teachers on the other and lets not forget the parents who will never subscribe to more difficult papers the outcome is pretty logical. Where is the path of least resistance:)

    That said statistically we should be as good if not better than anyone else if our system was not so distorted and sought to find these individuals rather than appease the various vested interests.

    Recognizing that the vested interests will defy logic at every step is the challenge, having elected and put in place a government that serves the unions makes me believe nothing will change in the short term.

    What we will do is distort the reality as long as possible, so long as no one is really complaining. As evidence most posters here are quite encouraged by the news from this years leaving certificate mathematics results.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    rumour wrote: »
    If we are below average by international standards then simply we are not good at Maths. Surely that simple concept should not be distorted.

    That isn't the conclusion I'd come to.

    If we are below average by international standards, I'd say our methods of teaching have fallen behind other countries not that our students aren't as capable.

    It is more unlikely IMO that we are genetically programmed or other nonsense to be poor at Math.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭sock puppet


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Hardly shocking that points for computer science rose during the dot com boom and dropped after the crash.

    As for grade inflation, as long as there is adequete differentiation between students it doesn't really matter what grades they get.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭rumour


    thebman wrote: »
    That isn't the conclusion I'd come to.

    If we are below average by international standards, I'd say our methods of teaching have fallen behind other countries not that our students aren't as capable.

    It is more unlikely IMO that we are genetically programmed or other nonsense to be poor at Math.

    Perhaps I should have qualified that with 'currently'. As for our students being capable, I do believe our students are capable but the standards need to be higher.

    I have three graduates in a team currently, two french and one Irish guy, on paper there is an equivalence of sorts. The Irish guy is being left behind, why?, because he thinks the questions should be explained to him. His colleagues are figuring it out analytically for themselves. This is just a current example I have many more of a similar nature.

    How much time should I spend trying to make the guy (who I believe is capable) think for himself? The alternative is just don't bother and employ another french guy.

    Frankly I have a job to do and it's not re-educating or de-institutionalizing products of the Irish education system.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,622 ✭✭✭maninasia


    Kinski wrote: »
    Colour me cynical, but the first year of Project Maths, and there's a "dramatic fall" in the failure rate? I guess they can call it a "resounding success."

    ..and in other news the number of failed ordinary level math students who applied for Journalism School has increased once again.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,622 ✭✭✭maninasia


    thebman wrote: »
    That isn't the conclusion I'd come to.

    If we are below average by international standards, I'd say our methods of teaching have fallen behind other countries not that our students aren't as capable.

    It is more unlikely IMO that we are genetically programmed or other nonsense to be poor at Math.

    It depends on the time and the quality of teaching.

    The leaving certificate offers a broad curriculum. I know from when I did the leaving certificate, at least 1/3 of my study time was devoted to Honours Maths. That was one subject out of NINE. It is no suprise that students have to go back and study more Maths in their 1st year of college. They will finally have some time and space to study it.

    Then there is the problem of poor teachers. This is not a cheap shot at teachers, it is simply the experience that I and many others had at public schools in Ireland. It is well known that the quality of teachers is one of the key determinants of students educational results. Look at the background of teachers teaching Maths. Does this make logical sense? Is this not a contradiction in terms?

    Finally I would say there should be more of an emphasis on Applied Maths, rather than pure Maths. Because in the end why are we learning Maths. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense if we were able to understand why certain subsets of Mathematics were developed and then apply that to our lives following graduation?

    Instead what happens is that we cram all this information in and 95% of it is lost and never used again in our adult lives and we in fact graduate without ever knowing what use is a matrix or integration. Let's get away from the Leaving Cert and remember the point about learning! The Leaving Cert is a poor measure of learning.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement