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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

*** Proposed New Junior Cert. **Read Mod Warning Post #1 Before Posting**

24567…14

Comments

  • #32
    Savanna Spicy Rye
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭ Savanna Spicy Rye


    I'm not against work to rule but I don't think it's a strong enough response to where we currently are in this dispute. Apart from that I think it would fail utterly as there's just too many teachers who would refuse to cooperate. Very few union members would cross a picket but plenty are willing to carry on with extra work, unpaid management duties etc - there's already many breaching directives on post duties for example.

    And obviously it's different for everyone but the difference in my net pay was miniscule after strike days.


  • #33
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    Savanna Spicy Rye wrote: »
    I'm not against work to rule but I don't think it's a strong enough response to where we currently are in this dispute. Apart from that I think it would fail utterly as there's just too many teachers who would refuse to cooperate. Very few union members would cross a picket but plenty are willing to carry on with extra work, unpaid management duties etc - there's already many breaching directives on post duties for example.

    And obviously it's different for everyone but the difference in my net pay was miniscule after strike days.

    No, I agree that not enough people would cooperate. it would be effective if it were done properly - not doing the class tutor role alone would bring many schools to a halt.

    One day's pay might not show up too much on a pay packet, but this will have to escalate if it's going to have any effect. And the other point is that while it may not make a big difference to a full time, permanent teacher, a day's pay can mean an awful lot to a part timer.


  • #34
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Well look, nothings going to happen just yet (and esp not before this june).

    So itll trundle along untill sept. then the ball is in dept. court when teachers refuse to take up the training (probably pencilled in for late october ) Maybe by then there will be shiny trinkets on the table with the pre-election slush fund.

    My take is that it's essentially kicked to touch till next election!


  • #35
    doc_17
    Registered Users Posts: 6,828 ✭✭✭doc_17


    I think the whole thing is done and dusted. Had a look at the latest concessions the government made. It's a completely resounding victory for the unions.

    Small details to be ironed out but compared to Ruairi Quinn's proposals it's very different.


  • #36
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    doc_17 wrote: »
    I think the whole thing is done and dusted. Had a look at the latest concessions the government made. It's a completely resounding victory for the unions.

    Small details to be ironed out but compared to Ruairi Quinn's proposals it's very different.

    How is it a victory when they said they don't want to mark the assessements AT ALL?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    acequion
    Registered Users Posts: 3,824 ✭✭✭acequion


    Savanna Spicy Rye wrote: »
    I'm not against work to rule but I don't think it's a strong enough response to where we currently are in this dispute. Apart from that I think it would fail utterly as there's just too many teachers who would refuse to cooperate. Very few union members would cross a picket but plenty are willing to carry on with extra work, unpaid management duties etc - there's already many breaching directives on post duties for example.

    And obviously it's different for everyone but the difference in my net pay was miniscule after strike days.

    I certainly felt it in mine,Savanna Spicy Rye! And while I'm more than prepared to do it again and to escalate if that's what people want,I think it could backfire. A ban on all the HR meetings would send a strong message to the DES and if the situation is still the same in September it could include the evening P/T meetings as before. I feel we would do better if this dragged on and became an election issue. It would also pretty much guarantee deferral of Science and English. Striking at this critical point in the school year could really turn the public hostile. Having them onside, especially so close to an election, is a definite plus.
    doc_17 wrote: »
    I think the whole thing is done and dusted. Had a look at the latest concessions the government made. It's a completely resounding victory for the unions.

    Small details to be ironed out but compared to Ruairi Quinn's proposals it's very different.

    What on earth are you talking about,doc_17? How have the unions got a "resounding victory"? Do please explain.


  • #38
    acequion
    Registered Users Posts: 3,824 ✭✭✭acequion


    Gebgbegb wrote: »
    Dont get me wrong, im all for suspending Extra Curricular... But I think unions wouldnt touch the idea with a bargepole.

    How about putting a ban on all lunch time meetings too! We're always expected to do meetings (fair enough) but if we're expected to meet over the latest inane initiative then give us time from class, I want to have my lunch! Ya sure I can say no, but sadly it wouldnt go down too well.

    I get so cross when I read stuff like this because EVERYBODY is entitled to a lunch break.And BREAK means BREAK. Any doctor will tell us that we shouldn't eat and work and that proper breaks are vital for good mental and physical health. So,when I see teachers running around at lunchtime trying to multi task in between bites of a sandwich and mouthfuls of water/tea,I despair! And utterly unacceptable that teachers do it because they feel they have no choice.
    katydid wrote: »
    It IS about the Junior Cert. It is about your supposed opposition to the proposals and the need to take action in response to the latest demands by the Department. Do you want to go on strike and lose several days pay rather than not do work you are not paid for and keep your money?

    The vast majority of teachers do extra curricular work of some kind or another, and the vast majority do non-contracted work such as class tutor administration. Of course they LIKE doing it, just like they LIKE teaching.

    But that's not the point - you are being forced by the Dept. to go work you claim you don't want to do. If you don't take a stand, either by going on strike or working to rule, you might as well just throw up your hands and do the blooming assessment, and all the protesting was for nothing. So do you take industrial action that involves you losing money, or do you take action that involves you not losing money?

    I'm not involved in the dispute because I'm not in the sector, but if I were, I wouldn't be too happy to lose more money than I've already lost.

    katydid,I don't want to start another argument with you and drag the thread off topic,but I really have to disagree with what's emboldened above.The "vast majority" of teachers don't do extra curricular.In my school it's about 50/50 and it varies widely from school to school. And as for they "LIKE" doing it, I wouldn't be at all sure about that.They might pretend to like it but I assure you many do it because they feel under pressure to do something extra. Absolutely nobody should ever be under pressure to do extra but sadly many are and many are exploited.


  • #39
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    acequion wrote: »
    I get so cross when I read stuff like this because EVERYBODY is entitled to a lunch break.And BREAK means BREAK. Any doctor will tell us that we shouldn't eat and work and that proper breaks are vital for good mental and physical health. So,when I see teachers running around at lunchtime trying to multi task in between bites of a sandwich and mouthfuls of water/tea,I despair! And utterly unacceptable that teachers do it because they feel they have no choice.



    katydid,I don't want to start another argument with you and drag the thread off topic,but I really have to disagree with what's emboldened above.The "vast majority" of teachers don't do extra curricular.In my school it's about 50/50 and it varies widely from school to school. And as for they "LIKE" doing it, I wouldn't be at all sure about that.They might pretend to like it but I assure you many do it because they feel under pressure to do something extra. Absolutely nobody should ever be under pressure to do extra but sadly many are and many are exploited.
    It's illegal to have meetings over lunchtime if it means a teacher working over four hours in a row, which is highly likely if they don't have a free before or after lunch.

    It depends what you mean by "extra-curricular". I agree that not everyone does the sport, the drama etc. But the vast majority do work above and beyond the call of duty, even if it's spending free time helping a student with work, or listening to their problems, but it's still extra-curricular as in outside the curriculum.


  • #40
    acequion
    Registered Users Posts: 3,824 ✭✭✭acequion


    katydid wrote: »
    It's illegal to have meetings over lunchtime if it means a teacher working over four hours in a row, which is highly likely if they don't have a free before or after lunch.

    It depends what you mean by "extra-curricular". I agree that not everyone does the sport, the drama etc. But the vast majority do work above and beyond the call of duty, even if it's spending free time helping a student with work, or listening to their problems, but it's still extra-curricular as in outside the curriculum.

    Fair enough and you're right that indeed the majority of teachers do go above and beyond the call of duty.


  • #41
    doc_17
    Registered Users Posts: 6,828 ✭✭✭doc_17


    acequion wrote: »
    I certainly felt it in mine,Arlessienne! And while I'm more than prepared to do it again and to escalate if that's what people want,I think it could backfire. A ban on all the HR meetings would send a strong message to the DES and if the situation is still the same in September it could include the evening P/T meetings as before. I feel we would do better if this dragged on and became an election issue. It would also pretty much guarantee deferral of Science and English. Striking at this critical point in the school year could really turn the public hostile. Having them onside, especially so close to an election, is a definite plus.



    What on earth are you talking about,doc_17? How have the unions got a "resounding victory"? Do please explain.

    Well I'm not saying the new JC will be wonderful. But as far as it being maintained as a state exam 100% certified by the state? Done deal. Well, according to the latest Travers document that was circulated at our union meeting on Wednesday night.

    Normally I'm very militant but this document is our greatest victory in years. Almost a complete reversal of Quinn's proposals. Now it's not perfect. But unlike HRA and CP it's a huge improvement on the initial proposals


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    solerina
    Registered Users Posts: 2,433 ✭✭✭solerina


    I would be quite happy to work to rule....no more class tutor duties, no more after school activities (I like doing them but would be quite happy to stop too) and no more Crock Park (not a mis-spelling) or HR hours would be fantastic, I would be delighted not to sit through anymore pointless meetings !!!

    I also think it might make the public wake up to how much is done for free from the good will of teachers if all the extra curricular stopped....its totally taken for granted now.


  • #43
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    solerina wrote: »
    I would be quite happy to work to rule....no more class tutor duties, no more after school activities (I like doing them but would be quite happy to stop too) and no more Crock Park (not a mis-spelling) or HR hours would be fantastic, I would be delighted not to sit through anymore pointless meetings !!!

    I also think it might make the public wake up to how much is done for free from the good will of teachers if all the extra curricular stopped....its totally taken for granted now.

    Unfortunately many of your colleagues wouldn't see it that way. The problem with teaching, like nursing, is that you are dealing with people, and while your head is telling you to work to rule, your heart is telling you differently.

    And the Dept. know this. They know that no matter how badly they treat teachers, how many "detentions" they give them, they will still do the football and the drama and the counselling, because that is what they do.


  • #44
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    doc_17 wrote: »
    Well I'm not saying the new JC will be wonderful. But as far as it being maintained as a state exam 100% certified by the state? Done deal. Well, according to the latest Travers document that was circulated at our union meeting on Wednesday night.

    Normally I'm very militant but this document is our greatest victory in years. Almost a complete reversal of Quinn's proposals. Now it's not perfect. But unlike HRA and CP it's a huge improvement on the initial proposals

    Teachers are still marking 40%. How is that a victory?


  • #45
    man_no_plan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭man_no_plan


    I can see doc_17's point. the argument was against state certification. the JC will be based on the tests set and marked externally. the 40% will be externally mandated but internally assessed.

    is it a good halfway house? I'm not sure, I want to read that report again and get my head around it a bit better.

    there has been success from the unions, and I know it was a hard sell to even get the ballot for industrial action off the ground. I think the lesson is that if its specific its easier to have success, when you muddy the waters its harder to deal with issues


  • #46
    acequion
    Registered Users Posts: 3,824 ✭✭✭acequion


    doc_17 wrote: »
    Well I'm not saying the new JC will be wonderful. But as far as it being maintained as a state exam 100% certified by the state? Done deal. Well, according to the latest Travers document that was circulated at our union meeting on Wednesday night.

    Normally I'm very militant but this document is our greatest victory in years. Almost a complete reversal of Quinn's proposals. Now it's not perfect. But unlike HRA and CP it's a huge improvement on the initial proposals

    I completely disagree. 40% teacher assessment is still there.Just not for state certification, NOT AT THE MOMENT. It still heaps extra work on teachers and is a slippery slope.I have only one thing to say and that's a resounding NO.

    As for the comparison with HRA, you could argue that the unions achieved enabling a limited amount of people to buy out of S&S.Yet nobody is hailing that as a big departure from the original proposals and rightly so.

    And as for the comparison with what Ruari Quinn proposed,that's like comparing Enda Kenny's pay with Bertie Ahern's and saying that Enda has taken a big pay cut [pat his back]. Of course it seems a big cut compared with the obscene money Ahern was on.Likewise, Ruari's 100% teacher assessment was outlandish.

    So,I wouldn't be flinging off the militant boots yet,doc_17!


  • #47
    doc_17
    Registered Users Posts: 6,828 ✭✭✭doc_17


    The JC exam is worth 100% of their state certified JC. The 40% we look at won't even get a grade from us.


  • #48
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    doc_17 wrote: »
    The JC exam is worth 100% of their state certified JC. The 40% we look at won't even get a grade from us.

    How do you mean "won't get a grade"? I thought it was getting school certification.


  • #49
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    katydid wrote: »
    How do you mean "won't get a grade"? I thought it was getting school certification.

    Reverse the truck there folks...

    As far as I can ascertain the whole deal is off. We teach on as normal with ZERO school/teacher based certification. For all intensive purposes the students' marks will be 100% June exams (plus the usual practicals/orals etc.)...

    Am I wrong ? To my mind I thought Travers was dead in the water (unless the govt. accepts it as a basis for further discussion!!).
    • Govt. says they are going with Travers II.
    • Union says No


  • #50
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    Gebgbegb wrote: »
    Reverse the truck there folks...

    As far as I can ascertain the whole deal is off. We teach on as normal with ZERO school/teacher based certification. For all intensive purposes the students' marks will be 100% June exams (plus the usual practicals/orals etc.)...

    Am I wrong ? To my mind I thought Travers was dead in the water (unless the govt. accepts it as a basis for further discussion!!).
    • Govt. says they are going with Travers II.
    • Union says No
    So what is Jan O'Sullivan insisting that you do?


  • #51
    implausible
    Registered Users Posts: 3,937 ✭✭✭implausible


    katydid wrote: »
    How do you mean "won't get a grade"? I thought it was getting school certification.

    The school cert will resemble an expanded school report. It won't have grades, rather we will tick comments from a national template.

    The internal assessments (e.g. English oral) will be carried out instead of Christmas or Summer tests.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    implausible wrote: »
    The school cert will resemble an expanded school report. It won't have grades, rather we will tick comments from a national template.

    The internal assessments (e.g. English oral) will be carried out instead of Christmas or Summer tests.

    You really think it'll be that simple? You won't be expected to do separate assessments?

    I don't think it's going to be that easy. I guess we'll have to wait and see.


  • #53
    man_no_plan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭man_no_plan


    katydid wrote: »
    You really think it'll be that simple? You won't be expected to do separate assessments?

    I don't think it's going to be that easy. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

    I thought you were In favour of teacher assessment?


  • #54
    Icsics
    Registered Users Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭Icsics


    I think experience has taught us to be very very careful about accepting 'deals' from this Govt. Look what happened with S&S and CP hours...they became compulsory & our conditions worsened. I will not accept any form of teacher assessment, because eventually we will be certifying for state assessment. If the JCert is so out of date then so must be the LCert, but the Govt won't touch that because the universities / ITs / Employers would be up in arms. We must stick to our guns!


  • #55
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    katydid wrote: »
    So what is Jan O'Sullivan insisting that you do?

    Doesn't matter what she is insisting, I will stand with my colleagues and follow the Union directive. The department does not provide education... they provide FOR education. So it's a case of either pay the wages or don't. Eveything else is done by consensus.


  • #56
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    Gebgbegb wrote: »
    Doesn't matter what she is insisting, I will stand with my colleagues and follow the Union directive. The department does not provide education... they provide FOR education. So it's a case of either pay the wages or don't. Eveything else is done by consensus.

    That's not the point. Of course you'll stick with the union directive. But there is no directive as of now, and in any case what does the union have to be against if nothing has changed.
    I'm confused. People are now basically saying nothing will change, except calling Christmas and Easter tests by some other name. But she seems to think that there is extra, specific assessment to be done.

    Which is it?


  • #57
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    man_no_plan wrote: »
    I thought you were In favour of teacher assessment?

    I am. I'm just confused that people are telling me that you won't be doing it, while the minister is saying you are.


  • #58
    implausible
    Registered Users Posts: 3,937 ✭✭✭implausible


    Afaik, the minister wants to plough ahead with the JCSA based on the Travers document. The unions are continuing with the industrial action of non-cooperation until they decide to either accept the document and go in and negotiate for resources or go out on strike again.

    It's a drastically different proposal to the one that RQ tried to railroad us into last year. He wanted 100% school-based assessment; now it's proposed that a percentage of each subject (60% in English) be examined and certified by the SEC and a percentage be assessed in-school and reported to parents.


  • #59
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    implausible wrote: »
    Afaik, the minister wants to plough ahead with the JCSA based on the Travers document. The unions are continuing with the industrial action of non-cooperation until they decide to either accept the document and go in and negotiate for resources or go out on strike again.

    It's a drastically different proposal to the one that RQ tried to railroad us into last year. He wanted 100% school-based assessment; now it's proposed that a percentage of each subject (60% in English) be examined and certified by the SEC and a percentage be assessed in-school and reported to parents.

    But the Travers document DOES involve assessments that are separate to normal school assessments, no?


  • #60
    implausible
    Registered Users Posts: 3,937 ✭✭✭implausible


    katydid wrote: »
    But the Travers document DOES involve assessments that are separate to normal school assessments, no?

    The document is here. School assessments will be done to a national timetable, students may be doing ten subjects and concerns about over-assessing students are mentioned frequently, so I cannot see how you could logistically have a pile of assessments leading up to Summer of 2nd year and then your usual inhouse Summer exams. That would be the overload the document says it's trying to avoid. That's without considering the paperwork and the confusion for parents that would cause - Summer test reports and a school assessment report?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    katydid wrote: »
    That's not the point. Of course you'll stick with the union directive. But there is no directive as of now, and in any case what does the union have to be against if nothing has changed.
    I'm confused. People are now basically saying nothing will change, except calling Christmas and Easter tests by some other name. But she seems to think that there is extra, specific assessment to be done.

    Which is it?

    Same directive as of 'pre Travers'....
    No calling christmas, easter other names. Everything as was.
    Minister can be saying whatever she likes but with no consensus then its all moot..

    ... except for refusing pay, thats all she can do.. then thats a whole different kettle of fish..which would be impolite to leave on any new incoming minister's desk! Unless she gets put back to education after the election!


Advertisement