Dramatic fall in number failing maths

later12 · 23-08-2012 3:04am

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).

djpbarry · 23-08-2012 9:49am

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.

itzme · 23-08-2012 10:24am

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.

doc_17 · 23-08-2012 7:12pm

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.

rumour · 23-08-2012 9:45pm

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.

thebman · 23-08-2012 10:46pm

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.

sock puppet · 23-08-2012 11:13pm

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.

rumour · 24-08-2012 12:45am

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.

maninasia · 24-08-2012 8:31am

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.

maninasia · 24-08-2012 8:39am

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.

djpbarry · 24-08-2012 12:00pm

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.

The reason Irish kids are not good at maths by international standards is because fewer and fewer (up to this year) were studying it to a high level.

rumour wrote: »

As evidence most posters here are quite encouraged by the news from this years leaving certificate mathematics results.

I have stated several times on this thread that what I am most encouraged by is the large increase in the number of students sitting the higher level maths exam.

tails_naf · 25-08-2012 12:25am

I was having dinner with a maths teacher friend of mine last night and she relayed part of the reason for Project Maths' success -

She said a lot of money was spent on it, so it 'had to work' - and by that she meant that the marking was made easier.

She gave an example of a probability question where the answer was 1/7 may be worth 10 points, but if you wrote 7/1 you got 9 marks. (a probability of 7/1 being impossible does not seem to trouble the marking scheme!)
She is personally troubled by this as a teacher - it's clearly a slip in standards, rather than an improvement in education.

Farmer Pudsey · 25-08-2012 1:00am

tails_naf wrote: »

I was having dinner with a maths teacher friend of mine last night and she relayed part of the reason for Project Maths' success -

She said a lot of money was spent on it, so it 'had to work' - and by that she meant that the marking was made easier.

She gave an example of a probability question where the answer was 1/7 may be worth 10 points, but if you wrote 7/1 you got 9 marks. (a probability of 7/1 being impossible does not seem to trouble the marking scheme!)
She is personally troubled by this as a teacher - it's clearly a slip in standards, rather than an improvement in education.

But surly if you showed your work all the way along and only put the answer in reverse then you deserve the 9 marks. When marking a maths question (or alot of science/technical graphics) it is the ability to demostrate how to solve the problem is important.

If you make a calculation error or an error in the display of the answer then why should you not get nearly all the marks for the question.

In maths gennerally you do not get all the marks for doing it in your head and writing down the answer after all you could have looked at the student in the next table answer.In my day we were always told to show your calculation.

tails_naf · 25-08-2012 1:08am

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

But surly if you showed your work all the way along and only put the answer in reverse then you deserve the 9 marks. When marking a maths question (or alot of science/technical graphics) it is the ability to demostrate how to solve the problem is important.

If you make a calculation error or an error in the display of the answer then why should you not get nearly all the marks for the question.

In maths gennerally you do not get all the marks for doing it in your head and writing down the answer after all you could have looked at the student in the next table answer.In my day we were always told to show your calculation.

Yes, I accept the method usually gets you most of the points. But any value greater than 1 should ring alarm bells for any probability answer - but aside from that awarding 9 points out of 10 is a bit much. In theory you could achieve an A1 by getting no answer 'right'. Hardly the standards we want to promote, surely?

ardmacha · 25-08-2012 2:03am

But surly if you showed your work all the way along and only put the answer in reverse then you deserve the 9 marks

If the answer is impossible you should get few marks, it should not just be question of cranking the handle
- probabilities > 1
- averages outside the range of numbers calculated
- answers an order of magnitude away from what they should be

Farmer Pudsey · 25-08-2012 10:04am

tails_naf wrote: »

Yes, I accept the method usually gets you most of the points. But any value greater than 1 should ring alarm bells for any probability answer - but aside from that awarding 9 points out of 10 is a bit much. In theory you could achieve an A1 by getting no answer 'right'. Hardly the standards we want to promote, surely?

ardmacha wrote: »

If the answer is impossible you should get few marks, it should not just be question of cranking the handle
- probabilities > 1
- averages outside the range of numbers calculated
- answers an order of magnitude away from what they should be

If to get to an answer you have to do 15-20 lines of calculation's and at the end write it 7/1 rather than 1/7 then I do not see how there is any issue giving the student 90% of the marks for that section of a question even if there are only 6-8 lines.
The student may have just made an error. It is impossible and student would get an A1 or A2 or even a B1 the laws of probilities would be against as you need to be excellent at maths to achieve that.

I think that we are having symantics about this it a bit like Football and hurling purist the hurling purists love Kilknenny because there is the total game even though it may be ruining hurling as nobody else can do it. While football purists hate Donegal even though for the last twenty years football has been so compeditive that only one team has won a two in a row

It is much the same with maths students were disinclined to take maths as you were not rewarded for the effort if you went to a grind school they pointed you towards Ag Science, Chemestry etc to get the points. Also if you failed maths you effectively failed the leaving as very few courses allow you entry without a pass in maths.

Anyway he may have been a bookie's son and express it the way his father roars it on the track
2-1 aaaaa
3-1bbbbb
4-1ccccc
10-1 the field

later12 · 26-08-2012 11:19am

ardmacha wrote: »

If the answer is impossible you should get few marks, it should not just be question of cranking the handle
- probabilities > 1
- averages outside the range of numbers calculated
- answers an order of magnitude away from what they should be

I can't speak for Project Maths, but have you ever seen the Junior & Leaving Certificate marking schemes for mathematics. They are extremely objective, describing in some detail where slips (-1 mark) and blunders (-3 marks) are to be deducted under very specific circumstances. A maths teacher doesn't just sit there arbitrarily deducting points as s/he sees fit; everyone is deducted the same points in accordance with very specific guidelines.

Again, I can't speak for the current Project Maths curriculum, but mathematics has traditionally been the most objective & most precisely corrected examination subject taken at Junior and Leaving certificate levels.

Dramatic fall in number failing maths

Comments