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
Strike On ! Proposed New Junior Cert **See Mod Warning Post #1**
Options
Comments
-
Inspector Coptoor wrote: »I think the unions have missed a beat here with them timing of the strike.
I think a better idea would have been to call a half day strike from lunch time on We'd 10th Dec and join in the world after charges protest.
I don't really give a $h1t€ about having th support of the public, they are largely a shower of race to the bottom, pay peanuts get monkeys, ill informed plebs, who firmly believe they know what a teacher's job entails simply by havung gone to school for 6 years.
I don't think striking achieves Anything though.
All that had to be done was return the continuous assessment project books to sender and refuse to monitor them.
I won't go against the Union directive but once again, I'm left disappointed by Union leadership.
I agree with most if not all of this post. You are 100% spot on about the public. Just take a look over at the AH thread about Donna Hartnett's letter and see the callous,contemptuous attitude of some posters towards her very real and very valid sentiments and it's hardly surprising that teachers get no support. Ok, posters on AH don't constitute the general public, but quite often social media has the pulse of the public at large. A public who lacks empathy with all disputes and problems,dismissing anyone who complains as a "moaner". So,I would urge collegues to forget about public opinion.
And I also have mixed feelings about a one day strike and what it might achieve. However,I do agree with the OP that our one and only hope is the union. We just have to put back on our boxing gloves again,make sure that we have school union meetings and attend the branch meetings. Because we have to convince our collegues to stand firm on this one.Teaching the new curriculum is not a breach of a union directive but not teaching it is possibly a breach of contract. You should check this with the Unions or perhaps you have a link to a different directive from them.
The union will always play it safe by fudging the issue. However as members,we did vote to not cooperate with the JCSA,so if nothing else I find it a moral betrayal that union members are actively teaching and supporting this course. As for breach of contract,I really couldn't give a damn! I am utterly fed up with the contempt shown to the profession of teaching and to the eduction system we are fighting to protect. So,disobeying my blue shirt employers is the least of my worries!0 -
Inspector Coptoor wrote: »I completely disagree with this.
If any Union came out with this directive, I would leave that union immediately.
I'm not so sure about that either….why do extra (and most do) when we are not respected, treated like crap by our "overlords" and loaded with what amounts to more and more compulsory work along with pressure to conform on top of the already hugely stressful (at times) work we do…not to mention the extra crap thats due to each particular school as well
what else do we have to fight with except our own free time that it more and more seems we foolishly give away when it seems that policy makers etc are deaf to the very real concerns of people doing the job that have years and years of experience of what works and what doesn't work
when the same "bolloxolgy" as another poster put it has been tried elsewhere and been exposed as a failure
Fine, load us up but well leave behind all the load we voluntarily carried before - we are given very little if any credit for it not to mention payment and its our time……from now on my time is money if I'm having my time wasted sitting in moronical cp meetings listening to the latest educational dogma (without proper resources or environment to implement them) - if were lucky, or chasing after students to complete ridiculous project work that ends up having more of a detrimental effect on their education than anything as were not free to let them fail as we should be because ultimately we know it will reflect badly on us despite it not being our fault that they won't do anything…or trying to impose discipline without a proper framework to do so etc etc…demands on our time are spiralling out of control
+its always our fault…were not building a good enough relationship with them etc, its not active enough……..well its hardly our fault when we do what were contracted to do and no more - ---- the more you do the more you're expected to do as far as i can see..its time to stop doing the GAAs and many other organisations work for them as tbh I honestly feel its hard enough to do the teaching part of the job nowadays anyway given the environment most of us have to operate in.0 -
I think the unions should have called for a stop to extra curricular immediately..all extra curricular. Then people will see what teachers do that they don't get paid for
A huge bone of contention,as many teachers consider them sacred, which probably shows just how dedicated,committed and talented those teachers are [I don't do any by the way], but I completely agree with you.0 -
When I was in first year, the results of our house exams at the end of first year were used to decide whether we did HL or OL in English, Irish and Maths. A similar arrangement with the JCSA could be used to decide whether students are suitable for HL or OL in LC History, Geography and in the science and business subjects.
If a student passes a common level subject how can you lay down the law and tell them they are only able for ordinary level. It may be as clear as day to the teacher, try telling that to the student.
Like a lot of your other opinions endakenny, you are basing your solution on your personal experience. Your personal experience is not what goes on in all schools.
You can't make students do ordinary level if they want to do higher level. Nor is it easy to reason with a student (and often their parents) who think they are able for higher level when they are clearly not.0 -
I'm not so sure about that either….why do extra (and most do) when we are not respected, treated like crap by our "overlords" and loaded with what amounts to more and more compulsory work along with pressure to conform on top of the already hugely stressful (at times) work we do…not to mention the extra crap thats due to each particular school as well
what else do we have to fight with except our own free time that it more and more seems we foolishly give away when it seems that policy makers etc are deaf to the very real concerns of people doing the job that have years and years of experience of what works and what doesn't work
when the same "bolloxolgy" as another poster put it has been tried elsewhere and been exposed as a failure
Fine, load us up but well leave behind all the load we voluntarily carried before - we are given very little if any credit for it not to mention payment and its our time……from now on my time is money if I'm having my time wasted sitting in moronically cp meetings listening to the latest educational dogma (without proper resources or environment to implement them) - if were lucky or chasing after students to complete ridiculous project work that ends up having more of a detrimental effect on their education than anything as were not free to let them fail as we should be because ultimately we know it will reflect badly on us despite it not being our fault that they won't do anything
its always our fault…were not building a good enough relationship with them etc, its not active enough……..well its hardly our fault when we do what were contracted to do and no more - ---- the more you do the more you're expected to do as far as i can see..its time to stop doing the GAAs and many other organisations work for them as tbh I honestly feel its hard enough to do the teaching part of the job nowadays anyway given the environment most of us have to operate in.
I see your point but I don't agree with youA huge bone of contention,as many teachers consider them sacred, which probably shows just how dedicated,committed and talented those teachers are [I don't do any by the way], but I completely agree with you.
Can you elaborate on the bone of contention part?0 -
Advertisement
-
I'm not so sure about that either….why do extra (and most do) when we are not respected, treated like crap by our "overlords" and loaded with what amounts to more and more compulsory work along with pressure to conform on top of the already hugely stressful (at times) work we do…not to mention the extra crap thats due to each particular school as well
what else do we have to fight with except our own free time that it more and more seems we foolishly give away when it seems that policy makers etc are deaf to the very real concerns of people doing the job that have years and years of experience of what works and what doesn't work
when the same "bolloxolgy" as another poster put it has been tried elsewhere and been exposed as a failure
Fine, load us up but well leave behind all the load we voluntarily carried before - we are given very little if any credit for it not to mention payment and its our time……from now on my time is money if I'm having my time wasted sitting in moronically cp meetings listening to the latest educational dogma (without proper resources or environment to implement them) - if were lucky or chasing after students to complete ridiculous project work that ends up having more of a detrimental effect on their education than anything as were not free to let them fail as we should be because ultimately we know it will reflect badly on us despite it not being our fault that they won't do anything
its always our fault…were not building a good enough relationship with them etc, its not active enough……..well its hardly our fault when we do what were contracted to do and no more - ---- the more you do the more you're expected to do as far as i can see..its time to stop doing the GAAs and many other organisations work for them as tbh I honestly feel its hard enough to do the teaching part of the job nowadays anyway given the environment most of us have to operate in.
Completely agree. And students no longer have any appreciation or respect for all the extras.They start with the clubs in my school at 8am,for crying out loud! Some new teacher just in the door got roped into it. I think it's insanity.0 -
We start at 07:15.
I'm in by 06:45.
That's my choice but I really enjoy what I do both in & out if the classroom0 -
Agreed. And who does substitution for the absent teacher for free when the hurling/football/soccer/camogie/basketball teams are away? Gob****e here.I think the unions should have called for a stop to extra curricular immediately..all extra curricular. Then people will see what teachers do that they don't get paid for
I have no problem with continuous assessment at all but if this comes in we must do something ourselves to ease our workload. Something has to give. Start with the freebie that is extra curricular.0 -
Inspector Coptoor wrote: »
Can you elaborate on the bone of contention part?
A bone of contention because so many teachers,like yourself, staunchly defend the extra curriculars. While I respect your views, I am in complete agreement with amacca. However,I think it's somewhat off the point and getting into it might derail the thread.0 -
I'm wondering how long till the union (asti) will come back with some proposal telling us that this is as far as the minister will go.. Ask us to vote AGAIN, and then the least informed teachers will carry the day0
-
Advertisement
-
Mrwhite1970 wrote: »Very few young teachers attend branch meetings. Its a chicken and egg scenario They don't go and thus their issues don't get priority .They claim issues not raised so they don't go.We have all been screwed over last few years. Improvement in young teachers conditions will only come through the unions. Nowhere else.
The revised payscale for new entrants and abolition of allowances were brought in for future entrants to the profession. So how could they have stood up for themselves at meetings before they were even qualified?
The people worst affected at present are those that qualified in 2012, 2013 and 2014, non of whom could have been members of the ASTI at the time of the cuts.
Yes, they should attend meetings after qualifying in order to fight for the cuts to be reversed, but the ASTI shouldn't have accepted them in the first place. They have every right to feel aggrieved.0 -
-
Completely agree. And students no longer have any appreciation or respect for all the extras.They start with the clubs in my school at 8am,for crying out loud! Some new teacher just in the door got roped into it. I think it's insanity.
Me too, I just think its not sustainable over the medium term never mind the long term….class contact time is very demanding high energy work…..you need downtime to recharge your batteries, prepare, plan and just switch off to destress….imagine going till 65 at that………..
All performers need lots of time if the performance is to be effective, theres a biological limit to what can be achieved, keep loading on the extras and reducing the downtime and the performance suffers.
It seems to me that education is no longer the central focus of the education system given the decisions that are being made…..I can't see how many of the decisions really have the students best interest at heart…I can see how some of them could have been good in theory but I would love the policy makers to see the reality of how these things have to be implemented on the ground due to the environment they create with other decisions/lack of resources etc…..they might see how moronical some of this stuff is…. but then again they probably already know - a lot of the existing project work I see with notable exceptions like practical subjects such as what used to be metalwork/woodwork and art are a gigantic time wasting sham with very little educational value imo
They probably already know though because as far as I can see its about reducing costs and beating down any dissenting voice that might oppose whatever the select groups that actually make decisions in this country decide….its ultimately about creating a cheaper high staff turnover system where the staff have little or no say, will get paid less and a large number won't care as they will be looking to move on soon after they enter leaving those that are stuck to survive.0 -
I feel like my teaching time is eroded more and more due to the demands on the me. Literacy, numeracy, DEAR time, corrections and I know before people jump all over this that those things are all part of teaching but they are fine on their own but it is all the paper work that goes with them0
-
must have a look through some other forums to see if many other professions have as many "contributions " from outside the profession as this one. It seems everyone knows how to do our job as its so easy. Its not like we need any qualifications of anything like that. Must go and tell a few doctors what they should be prescribing ......0
-
Any teacher around about the 50 years of age mark may be given some incentive to retire in the next year or two.This would alleviate all the noise made about conditions and how they have deteriorated over the past 7 or 8 years.It would also mean that all the 'yellow pack' teachers (who have never known good working conditions) and have just got a job in the recent past will be tied into 'low' wages and will have to part take in the running of the school by taking unpaid posts,(quite a lot of this is going on already anyways).Get as many teachers as possible on as low a wage as possible,make sure they are double and triple taxed for everything (how many times do we actually pay for water?).This in turn will get rid of families,how many people do you know at present that have put off starting a family because they cannot afford a mortgage or a child.Smaller families will mean less need for teachers,saving more money in the long term......and the wonderful new junior cert will only need the history teacher for a 'short course' then the teacher can move on to a neighbouring school and do the short course there and so on......while Edna and his gang of cronies and corrupters retire into the sunset on their many pensions.....IT WILL THEN BE REALISED DOWN THE ROAD THAT WE NEED CHILDREN AFTER ALL,they will work and pay tax which will help top up the cronies pensions................and as an incentive there will be a 'grant' paid to any couple that decide to have a child so as to keep the circle turning!:rolleyes:0
-
As an outsider looking in, trying not to be too simplistic, would you all not just award EVERY candidate an A1 in the project assessment. This would imo be a very effective industrial action as it would force the government into having the SEC assess all exam components.0
-
The Letheram wrote: »As an outsider looking in, trying not to be too simplistic, would you all not just award EVERY candidate an A1 in the project assessment. This would imo be a very effective industrial action as it would force the government into having the SEC assess all exam components.
Ruin a few kids results to prove a point?0 -
Ruin a few kids results to prove a point?
I think that point would be that if the SEC received A1 grades across all JCSA subjects for approximately 60,000 students they would be either A: forced to award final grade based on the written exam only which would still be corrected under the current system, or B: collect all that coursework and re-assess it, again anonymously and then add it to the written mark.0 -
Mod Gentle Warning
We've done the blame game of young vs' old teachers to death on here so I think the time is appropriate to move on.
Also the circular argument of ASTI vs TUI/INTO.
Also management vs' teachers.
These can muddy the waters of the substantive issue of the proposed JCSA and the strike action. It looks like this is going to be 'The strike-thread', so for the proposes of civility I'd ask that we just try to keep the title in mind to focus the debate as a lot of 'kitchen sinks' are going to get thrown around.
As usual...
Read charter (there will be a test for the boldies).
Report stuff ... or use the ignore function for people who annoy you.
It's an open forum so think of it as an oppertunity to challenge and change some peoples' views.
0 -
Advertisement
-
I look forward to parents saying the likes of "He [disruptive little lazy bastard] would have got an A only for the teacher didn't like him" under the new system. More teachers scapegoated, more abdication of responsibility by bad parents who wilfully persist in being both deluded about their child's capability and in denial about their disruptive behaviour.
Nothing but bad blood to be had with this one.0 -
acequion, I think you are confusing external assessment and external moderation, I was suggesting assessment, as is done currently for home ec, science, music, woodwork, metalwork, etc.0
-
Not only do you think this JCSA is inevitable,you appear to actively support it. Perhaps you might tell us why?
By focusing on the JCSA curriculum, you are most certainly contravening a union directive. The current curriculum and its assessment does not include the term,"learning outcomes", a nothing buzz word dreamt up by the proponents of a narrow education philosophy which is "outcomes" or quite simply, results, obsessed. I also disagree with your earlier comment that the current system needs to change.Certain changes need to be made for sure, but changes and updated syllabus can be incorporated into the present system. I also teach English and you are quite wrong to assume that the majority of teachers have changed the course book.I know for a fact that all the schools in the large town where I teach have stuck with their old texts and have not changed their practice.
Certainly. I am in favour of change in the English curriculum as the current system is outdated and I think it's dreadfully unfair on students to only be assessed on what they can write in one or two papers in June. Assessing their oral capabilities and allowing them to build up a collection of work over 2 1/2 years is fairer on students who may not perform in exams. The option to incorporate ICT into the curriculum is also welcome.
What I am not in favour of is the bulldozer way RQ tried to shove this is, the way we were made start a new course before being given full information on assessment and the awful 'inservice'. I think Jan O'Sullivan should have put it off until September 2015. I am not in favour of tonnes of extra paperwork and some teachers giving it all, while others fire a mark down on a page. I am not in favour of the huge time pressure we're going to be under. I am not in favour of inequality between schools, but now that the Govt are offering state certification and a system of external moderation, I am somewhat appeased, as they would have been my biggest gripes.
In my school, we have been using learning outcomes and Assessment for Learning for the last seven years. They are by no means new or exclusive to the JCSA. Teachers have always had learning outcomes, you cannot teach a course without knowing what you want the students to learn! The current JC Science guidelines use the phrase 'learning outcomes' 41 times.
I am the rep, I am not contravening the union directive. Have you actually read it? I've quoted it here:1. Not to attend CPD organised in connection with the Junior Cycle Framework Proposals.
2. Not to attend meetings associated with the Junior Cycle Framework Proposals.
3. Not to attend any planning meeting or participate in any planning activities organised in connection with the Junior Cycle Framework Proposals.
4. Not to engage in any aspect of school-based assessment for the purpose of the Junior Cycle Student Award (JCSA).
5. Not to engage in any development of or delivery of Junior Cycle Framework Short Courses.
6. Not to engage in any event, activity or function related to points 1 to 5 above.0 -
It is likely that all of that pupil's teachers would have a problem with them and it's thus unlikely that a group of teachers, as opposed to one teacher, would be scapegoated.I look forward to parents saying the likes of "He B]disruptive little lazy bastard[/B would have got an A only for the teacher didn't like him" under the new system. More teachers scapegoated, more abdication of responsibility by bad parents who wilfully persist in being both deluded about their child's capability and in denial about their disruptive behaviour.
Nothing but bad blood to be had with this one.
Furthermore, even if a principal put pressure on teachers to give unjustified marks in the JCSA, they can report him or her to the Teaching Council.
Besides, teachers would know that giving unjustified marks in the JCSA would leave pupils unprepared for the Leaving Cert. Surely, parents wouldn't forget about that.0 -
Boober Fraggle wrote: »acequion, I think you are confusing external assessment and external moderation, I was suggesting assessment, as is done currently for home ec, science, music, woodwork, metalwork, etc.
Apols if I took you up wrong Boober Fraggle. Do please explain how it is done in those subjects.I teach English and languages. However, we have already argued external monitoring of teacher marking in these threads and I remain firmly against it. Because basically, marking and monitoring is a full time exercise and even for only a small section of overall assessment,I would wonder where the time for this would be found.The month of June perhaps??? Also,having done this difficult work by choice and for payment,I would be outraged that teachers be forced into it for free. As another poster said, it would lead to bad blood all around.0 -
Apols if I took you up wrong Boober Fraggle. Do please explain how it is done in those subjects.I teach English and languages. However, we have already argued external monitoring of teacher marking in these threads and I remain firmly against it. Because basically, marking and monitoring is a full time exercise and even for only a small section of overall assessment,I would wonder where the time for this would be found.The month of June perhaps??? Also,having done this difficult work by choice and for payment,I would be outraged that teachers be forced into it for free. As another poster said, it would lead to bad blood all around.
I'll take home ec as an example. Students do a piece of craft work (knitting, sewing, needlework) and write up a project about it. They also are given a cookery task. An external examiner comes in in march/ April and supervises the students cooking, and marks their work, based on a set of criteria. They also look at the craftwork and written project and mark it.
I would imagine something similar could be arranged in other subjects, and marked externally in the same manner.
I would not like to see teachers assessing their own students, whether monitored externally or not. The work of the monitor would be extremely difficult, as teachers would be very sensitive about criticism of their marks, and modification of marks as a result of monitoring would be very time consuming.0 -
implausible wrote: »Certainly. I am in favour of change in the English curriculum as the current system is outdated and I think it's dreadfully unfair on students to only be assessed on what they can write in one or two papers in June. Assessing their oral capabilities and allowing them to build up a collection of work over 2 1/2 years is fairer on students who may not perform in exams. The option to incorporate ICT into the curriculum is also welcome.
What I am not in favour of is the bulldozer way RQ tried to shove this is, the way we were made start a new course before being given full information on assessment and the awful 'inservice'. I think Jan O'Sullivan should have put it off until September 2015. I am not in favour of tonnes of extra paperwork and some teachers giving it all, while others fire a mark down on a page. I am not in favour of the huge time pressure we're going to be under. I am not in favour of inequality between schools, but now that the Govt are offering state certification and a system of external moderation, I am somewhat appeased, as they would have been my biggest gripes.
In my school, we have been using learning outcomes and Assessment for Learning for the last seven years. They are by no means new or exclusive to the JCSA. Teachers have always had learning outcomes, you cannot teach a course without knowing what you want the students to learn! The current JC Science guidelines use the phrase 'learning outcomes' 41 times.
I am the rep, I am not contravening the union directive. Have you actually read it? I've quoted it here:
Fair enough you are not technically contravening the directive,I was wrong.
However,in my opinion,by actively teaching this new course,you are betraying your fellow union members who voted en masse to not cooperate with it. By teaching the course,you are cooperating with it. Ok, it's a grey area because the union don't want to be accused of instructing members to be in breach of contract,but,in my view,you are either cooperating with this new course or not.And you are.You also talk about it as a foregone conclusion which it is not, while there is such opposition to it.
In my school, buzz words like AFL have also been bandied about for years,with our principal in a right tizzy that we be seen to be doing all this during inspections.Two stars and a wish or some such nonsense! Sorry but I have nothing but contempt for such fancy,fluffy ideas and terminology. I have been teaching English for over 25 years and I know exactly what I want each class to learn,how each student learns and how to assess them. I don't need to have to tick any box with frilly terms to that effectively.
While I welcome the inclusion of an oral component and ICT into English, I disagree about the final exam.The LC is a terminal exam where all knowledge has to be displayed on the day. Perhaps that is unfair and undoubtedly stressful, but such is life. No point in shielding them from it. The current JC English course is a good one, allowing teachers to choose their own texts, thereby tailoring to each class. The new course takes away that choice with prescribed texts.The current course also tests their ability to write in a variety of registers and definitely separates the wheat from the chaff. Nothing wrong with that and sets them up well for LC. The course in modern languages,on the other hand, is definitely outdated and needs radical change.But overall I would be very satisfied with the current JC English programme and would be very sorry to see it weakened, as I fear it will be if this goes ahead.0 -
It is likely that all of that pupil's teachers would have a problem with them and it's thus unlikely that a group of teachers, as opposed to one teacher, would be scapegoated.
Not necessarily. Again enda you are generalised based on your personal experience. I have had parents come to parent teacher meetings as have other teachers in my school who will say 'well she's getting on fine in all other subjects except yours, therefore you're the problem'.
1. A student can find one subject difficult and get on fine in all others.
2. A student can just decide they don't like a subject/teacher and not work for that subject and work away in all other subjects.
3. A student will spin all sorts of stories to their parents to get out of the grilling about the fail in the Christmas test for that particular subject.
4. I acknowledge that there are some bad teachers out there, like there are people in all professions that are not good at their jobs, but you tend to find when this happens that problems for students with the subject are widespread within a class rather than just one student failing.
So to give you an example of this: I had a blazing row with a parent at a parent teacher meeting about 3 years ago, I wasn't expecting it. The student was never going to set the world on fire in science but wasn't working either. Despite all of this I got along well with the student. The mother decided to pick a fight with me at the PTM and obviously I was picking on her daughter and it was my fault she was failing. She insisted on arranging a meeting with myself, herself and the daughter the following week. I said no problem. She brought her daughter to this meeting. She was trying to ambush me.
Anyway so I started off proceedings and I said to the daughter 'Your mother asked to have a meeting between all of us because of your grades in science and she feels that there is a problem there and we need to sort it out' I was careful not to lay blame at anyone's door. I continued by saying 'I told your mother that I think you can pass the subject, but you spend a lot of time in class looking out the window, a giggling and being generally distracted so you miss a lot of what is going on'. At this point the daughter turned to the mother and said 'ya, I'm awful distracted in class and a bit giddy'.
Now the mother had nothing to say after that and it was clear she hadn't told the daughter about the row or didn't prep her. Daughter pulled up her socks, passed in the end and came back and thanked me when she got her JC results. The mother though was just looking for a row and a scapegoat and when it came to fifth year subject choices she rang the school and insisted that the daughter not be placed in my class for my subject and go into the other teachers instead. Because our two classes are on different blocks, the daughter ended up taking a subject that she failed in JC because of her mother's insistence that she not be taught by me.
That's a relatively rare incidence for me, but there are plenty of others with similarities of parents who are fed lies by their children about how much work they are doing in class and don't believe the teacher when we tell them that they are not working/ disruptive.
Furthermore, even if a principal put pressure on teachers to give unjustified marks in the JCSA, they can report him or her to the Teaching Council.
You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that's going to happen. I've examined in schools and have dealt with teachers, principals, deputy principals who have given me spiels such as 'John is a great lad, now he finds the subject difficult, but he's a great county footballer', i.e. we've awarded this grade not because he's any great shakes at the subject but he plays GAA for the county minors so that's justification enough.
Besides, teachers would know that giving unjustified marks in the JCSA would leave pupils unprepared for the Leaving Cert. Surely, parents wouldn't forget about that.
Parents won't question their little darlings coming out with an A or a B in the JCSA. They'll just think 'aren't they fantastic'. No parent wants to think anything else of their child. Whether they are prepared or not for Leaving Cert is a whole different kettle of fish.0 -
implausible wrote: »Certainly. I am in favour of change in the English curriculum as the current system is outdated and I think it's dreadfully unfair on students to only be assessed on what they can write in one or two papers in June. Assessing their oral capabilities and allowing them to build up a collection of work over 2 1/2 years is fairer on students who may not perform in exams. The option to incorporate ICT into the curriculum is also welcome.
I don't have a major problem with alternative forms of assessment if they are actually based on the students doing something worthwhile (unlike that unmitigated disaster of a science syllabus I posted last night) but even with the example you've given about the oral work, currently the students that do LCVP have to do 6 tasks for their portfolio, not unlike what is being proposed for the JCSA and the portfolio is sent away with their exam for correction.
One of the possible tasks is a recorded interview. I got landed with LCVP 2 years ago and had to do all the recorded interviews, they were put on disks numbered, list of exam numbers put in with them and away they went for external correction.
Can't see why the Dept of Ed can't sanction this for JCSA.0 -
Advertisement
-
However,in my opinion,by actively teaching this new course,you are betraying your fellow union members who voted en masse to not cooperate with it. By teaching the course,you are cooperating with it. Ok, it's a grey area because the union don't want to be accused of instructing members to be in breach of contract,but,in my view,you are either cooperating with this new course or not.And you are.You also talk about it as a foregone conclusion which it is not, while there is such opposition to it.
In my school, buzz words like AFL have also been bandied about for years,with our principal in a right tizzy that we be seen to be doing all this during inspections.Two stars and a wish or some such nonsense! Sorry but I have nothing but contempt for such fancy,fluffy ideas and terminology. I have been teaching English for over 25 years and I know exactly what I want each class to learn,how each student learns and how to assess them. I don't need to have to tick any box with frilly terms to that effectively.
While I welcome the inclusion of an oral component and ICT into English, I disagree about the final exam.The LC is a terminal exam where all knowledge has to be displayed on the day. Perhaps that is unfair and undoubtedly stressful, but such is life. No point in shielding them from it. The current JC English course is a good one, allowing teachers to choose their own texts, thereby tailoring to each class. The new course takes away that choice with prescribed texts.The current course also tests their ability to write in a variety of registers and definitely separates the wheat from the chaff. Nothing wrong with that and sets them up well for LC. The course in modern languages,on the other hand, is definitely outdated and needs radical change.But overall I would be very satisfied with the current JC English programme and would be very sorry to see it weakened, as I fear it will be if this goes ahead.
We voted not to cooperate with assessment. I am not conducting formal assessment, nor am I getting them to compile a portfolio of work.
It is quite offensive to suggest that I am betraying my colleagues when all I am doing is teaching my classes. For example, I have just finished teaching "Back in the Playground Blues", I spent a bit longer than I usually would getting the students to compare their first day at school with each other and at the end I got them to recite it and my scheme of work has some coding in it referring to the Learning Outcomes, but other than that, I have taught the poem in the same way. The kids are learning, what exactly is the problem?
You seem to have a right bee in your bonnet about 'fluffy' terminology and are quite dismissive of anything new. What exactly is wrong with two stars and a wish? I have students whose confidence and interest in my subject would be destroyed if I didn't give some positive feedback to them. I wouldn't call that nonsense. Maybe you have excellent students who are fully engaged and will learn regardless. I don't. We are frequently bombarded with new initiatives and ideas, not all of them suit everyone, but as teachers, we cannot be dismissive of all change if it might serve the interests of our students. It reminds me of a colleague at a recent event, who, while dismissing the info that had just been delivered on questioning and mindmapping, stated, "I'll keep teaching the way I like because my way of teaching suits me!" I am teaching 15 years and would hate to get to a stage where I feel I know everything and am not open to change.
The new JC will still have a terminal exam - 60%. I'd still call that good preparation for the Leaving Cert. We can still tailor the course to our students with the prescribed texts, like the LC. I did not post here to defend the new JCSA, though I do think it has merit, but to contradict the notion that English teachers are ignoring the new course.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement