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).

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Not really. Private schools such as the ones you listed with fees automatically exclude students from socio economic backgrounds that can't afford to attend. They also tend not to accept their fair share of students with learning difficulties and behavioural problems. If their patents are paying for them to attend they are generally earning a decent wage. Those parents are earning a salary which is reflective of perhaps business ownership or a third level education which has led to work with higher remuneration than the industrial average. They tend to be interested in their child's education and can afford to throw money at it to fix any shortcomings - grinds. Those students will achieve wherever they go because they have support.

However I work in a town where 60% of housing is social housing, unemployment is high, job opportunities are few and there is nothing for third level graduates unless you are going into the family business. Many students come from families with no history of sttending third level bon some houses there is no history of employment. Despite all of this more than 50% of our students are going to third level because they are achieving and want to achieve and some of them are coming from these backgrounds. More do PLCs and go on to college that way.

The students I teach don't have a private school on their cv. They don't list a Leinster senior cup medal on their list of achievements. Daddy doesn't know a barrister who knows someone in the law faculty at the university. The points system allows them to apply for places in university alongside the private school students and be accepted on only their points if they put the work in.

If the schools you listed above even had a fraction of the student cohort my school has you would soon see those percentages come back in line with national average.

I am contending the the LC is not the paragon of fairness that a poster above suggested. Please be conscious that what I'm saying now is self-deprecating and generously revealing:

I attended the private school that has consistently been the top feeder to Trinity over the last decade. On the first day of fifth year, our headmaster (whom we rarely saw at any other time than supporting the rugby teams) gathered us for an assembly, got a third of us to stand up, and said, "All of you will get 500 points or more". He then had another third stand up, and said, "All of you will get four hundred points or more". As you will agree, when in an environment where the difficulty of achieving such points is down-played, where a third of the year goes on to TCD and another third to UCD, where class sizes are small (I had six in my physics class (though, admittedly, that is unrepresentative)), and where soci-economic factors don't hinder education, an achievement that would be exceptional in DEIS school could be average in mine.

In only considering one's points-score, the CAO is woefully deficient because it fails to recognise exceptional "disadvantaged" students.

We agree about fee-paying schools and the reasons for their performance; we disagree, however, that the means by which universities select students is fair.