Junior Cert Reform

jam17032010 · 17-03-2014 1:19pm

I know teachers who inflate their Cmas and Summer grades to make themselves look good. And people think that teachers would be too professional to do this for the new Junior Cert?? Ha!!

The system should not give people the opportunity to label a teacher as being professional/unprofessional in their marking. There should be no doubt about fairness and unbias. And the only way to do that is independent and anonymous marking.

Mod Note: Please do not infer that the teachers you know of are representative of the whole teaching profession without proof. Sweeping statements are not appreciated.

seavill · 17-03-2014 1:24pm

jam17032010 wrote: »

I know teachers who inflate their Cmas and Summer grades to make themselves look good. And people think that teachers would be too professional to do this for the new Junior Cert?? Ha!!

And i know teachers that correct their exams properly. Makes little difference. Personally I wasn't saying that teachers wouldn't do it, as highlighted below from my previous post, there will always be people that will and won't in all walks of life but the point I was making was just because one did and acts in an unprofessional manner doesn't mean we all will.

seavill wrote: »

I am giving my opinion based on years of already marking my own students and doing it in a professional way, meaning that any gripes/disagrrements are meaningless when I sit down the last week of May to correct my student's work. Yes there will always be people that are not professional and won't do things properly but to make sweeping generalizations about an entire profession (as was discussed in the new charter thread) I feel is baseless and misleading.

Benicetomonty · 17-03-2014 1:24pm

seavill wrote: »

You do state that it's students that the teacher may not like but you clarify that with the fact that this will effect your marking of their work. Which essentially is saying that teachers will grade based on whether they like the student or not. You can word it whatever way you want but that is essentially what you are saying.

You didn't mention in your last post that you were referring to English when you were talking about the correction. Although I don't think that it's something to do with single subjects. Every subject teacher will end up correcting their own work. Every subject is subjective. As "easy" as it appears to mark construction studies this goes back to a misconception. An example being one large chunk of marks goes towards "safe use of machines and tools". Now the external examiner cannot know this. only the class teacher can and based on "everything they do (or don't do) from the end of 5th year" goes towards the assessment. English is absolutely a very subjective subject however in it's own way so is every subject. We would have a written booklet with the practical piece in Construction Studies. This is the same as getting an essay in English. Completely subjective in terms of the grading of it.

You say "mistakes" this time, what do you mean by this? Are you simply putting the word bias in a different term? Your post whether you initially meant it or not is saying that teachers will end up grading their students work based on whether they like the person or not. "you are quite actively going to dislike people you work with, and students arent exempt from this.......And that means bias is an inevitability when marking or moderating."

You may think it is initevable that the "mistakes"/"bias" will occur. That is your opinion, that is fine. However it doesn't necessarily make it true. I am giving my opinion based on years of already marking my own students and doing it in a professional way, meaning that any gripes/disagrrements are meaningless when I sit down the last week of May to correct my student's work. Yes there will always be people that are not professional and won't do things properly but to make sweeping generalizations about an entire profession (as was discussed in the new charter thread) I feel is baseless and misleading.

Oh no, your original understanding was quite accurate, I do believe that results will be influenced by bad pupil/teacher relationships, but had to point out the difference between what was stated and what was inferred.

But I disagree that this is an especially sweeping statement: since you agree that it is likely that some people will always be 'unprofessional' about these things, then you know and admit bias will be an issue. Why change to a system where results might be questionable from one where there can be no doubt? One student that may be affected by this is too many, and reason enough to justify my concerns.

You say all subjects are subjective. Id agree but argue that some are way moreso than others. JC Geography for instance is pretty much right or wrong, key word there..etc. There is absolutely no comparison between geography and English as far as correcting is concerned.

Im obviously not a construction teacher and in my ignorance had no idea that teachers of the subject were already essentially marking their own students work for state accreditation. You say a large chunk of marks go towards safety in class. How much exactly? I think its safe to say if that concept was extended to all LC subjects, parents and people in general would be a lot more vocal in their concerns than we're hearing at the moment, because theyd know it was open to abuse

Also, if it isnt the loss of transparency and anonymity youre worried about with regards to the new JC, what are you worried about?

implausible · 17-03-2014 1:35pm

The most logical and simple way to avoid grade inflation and accusations of non-professionalism is to have a thorough and robust external moderation system, whereby someone who is both qualified and experienced double-checks the inhouse assessment against a national standard. This is already done for FETAC.

However, the minister does not seem to think this necessary or important. He expects English teachers to start teaching a new course in September after only one day of inservice. We have not heard a word about assessment and are expected to carry on until we get a another single day focusing on assessment after we've been teaching it a few months. Now, the reason given was that we don't need to know until then. The truth - they don't know themselves. The poor woman giving the inservice looked at me like I had two heads when I asked about recording of oral presentations and external moderation. Another woman I know who is involved in the rollout is complaining that the assessment toolkit isn't ready yet. They are rolling out a course that is NOT ready yet and as an English teacher, I feel like a guinea pig.

An inspector would est me without salt if I didn't have comprehensive plans and yet, here I am, expected to deliver a course that I cannot plan for. You're getting on a train and are not being told where it's going to stop.

seavill · 17-03-2014 1:38pm

Benicetomonty wrote: »

But I disagree that this is an especially sweeping statement: since you agree that it is likely that some people will always be 'unprofessional' about these things, then you know and admit bias will be an issue. Why change to a system where results might be questionable from one where there can be no doubt? One student that may be affected by this is too many, and reason enough to justify my concerns.

You say all subjects are subjective. Id agree but argue that some are way moreso than others. JC Geography for instance is pretty much right or wrong, key word there..etc. There is absolutely no comparison between geography and English as far as correcting is concerned.

Im obviously not a construction teacher and in my ignorance had no idea that teachers of the subject were already essentially marking their own students work for state accreditation. You say a large chunk of marks go towards safety in class. How much exactly? I think its safe to say if that concept was extended to all LC subjects, parents and people in general would be a lot more vocal in their concerns than we're hearing at the moment, because theyd know it was open to abuse

Also, if it isnt the loss of transparency and anonymity youre worried about with regards to the new JC, what are you worried about?

I'm trying to be careful not to refer back to something that has already been "moderated" on already on this thread but I'm presuming that seen as I am responding to your comment I won't get in any more trouble.
I already said that I agree some people will be bias and unprofessional, and I agree with you that this shouldn't be allowed effect one student, let alone them all. My point was initially that your post came across to me as it will be a widespread issue (I know you didn't use those words) just the way I read it.
I can tell you already that in Construction there is a day practical exam which can take place anytime over 2 week period. Obviously after the first day there is a chance that people doing it on the 2nd day will have seen the paper. I always pick day 1 and 2 to do mine as I feel that this is the point of hte exam. Another teacher close to me does it at the end of the 2 weeks and spends the 2 weeks preparing his class for the paper, he basically has a copy of it on his desk for 2 weeks. Completely unprofessional but not necessarily widespread.

Again I agreed with you that English is very subjective, I won't comment on other subjects as I don't know the details. But most are subjective to a point.

The safety and practices of making in class is 30 marks out of 120 wich is obviously 25% a massive mark.

As I siad previously to you I don't agree with the new plans and no where did I say subjectivity wouldn't be an issue in fact I said the opposite however
My main issue would be with where RQ got the rationale for these decisions when you put them up against what the NCCA actually recommended to him

Benicetomonty · 17-03-2014 4:57pm

"Completely unprofessional but not necessarily widespread."

I think we're actually on the same page about a lot of the issues tbh. Mind you, if I assume that your Construction department is limited to a maximum of 3 teachers (at least as far as teaching 5th and 6th years is concerned), it would seem that 33% of it is 'unprofessional' by your own definition. Which seems very widespread to me.

Anyway, like you said, just my opinion of where this is headed. Slainte!

seavill · 17-03-2014 5:04pm

Benicetomonty wrote: »

"Completely unprofessional but not necessarily widespread."

I think we're actually on the same page about a lot of the issues tbh. Mind you, if I assume that your Construction department is limited to a maximum of 3 teachers (at least as far as teaching 5th and 6th years is concerned), it would seem that 33% of it is 'unprofessional' by your own definition. Which seems very widespread to me.

Anyway, like you said, just my opinion of where this is headed. Slainte!

That teacher I referred to was from a previous school one of 5 teachers (massive school) 2 in mine and 2 in diff previous school 1 out of 9 as opposed to one out of 3 in your statement above. 11% overall in my example. Not a small number but certainly not widespread if was 1 of 9 people. Although obviously percentages in small numbers like this mean little one in nine explains it better. I think the examples I give are more evidence based using the example of a subject where parts are already in play even though not an exact comparison.

Like I said I agree there will be some there is in all walks of life.

whiteandlight · 17-03-2014 5:28pm

Benicetomonty wrote: »

But I disagree that this is an especially sweeping statement

seavill wrote: »

I'm trying to be careful not to refer back to something that has already been "moderated" on already on this thread but I'm presuming that seen as I am responding to your comment I won't get in any more trouble.

There has been a very clear warning given on thread about general sweeping statements and one in relation to responding to moderation on thread.

Please refrain from repeating this. Future posts in this vein will result in infractions.

Do not respond to this warning on thread.

whiteandlight · 17-03-2014 5:50pm

Having read through the recent debate I think we might all agree the following?

1. Some teachers may inflate their grades for whatever reasons, be it a conscious or unconscious decision or external influence.
2. Some teachers may never inflate their grades again for any reason.

I think the question that is arising is really, will the group that may exist in point 1 cause issues in the system?

Personally I think that having no external moderation is too big a swing. Even the teachers are inspected and tested on their teaching by people outside the profession. This happens in all walks of life and personally I think external grading should continue in the Junior Cycle if only for the exam part.

jam17032010 · 17-03-2014 10:12pm

implausible wrote: »

The most logical and simple way to avoid grade inflation and accusations of non-professionalism is to have a thorough and robust external moderation system, whereby someone who is both qualified and experienced double-checks the inhouse assessment against a national standard. This is already done for FETAC.

I'm not sure if this will work for the new Junior Cert. They would have to have hundreds of these moderators on the go, checking assessments. To save on costs, I'd bet that inspections would be few and far between. When the new Junior Science syllabus came in we were told that inspectors would be calling randomly to check the Coursework A (10% of overall mark). In 8 years I have never seen one and Coursework A is merely a box ticking exercise where every student gets their 10%.

rainbowtrout · 17-03-2014 11:25pm

jam17032010 wrote: »

I'm not sure if this will work for the new Junior Cert. They would have to have hundreds of these moderators on the go, checking assessments. To save on costs, I'd bet that inspections would be few and far between. When the new Junior Science syllabus came in we were told that inspectors would be calling randomly to check the Coursework A (10% of overall mark). In 8 years I have never seen one and Coursework A is merely a box ticking exercise where every student gets their 10%.

i must be the only science teacher in the country who refuses to let students tick the boxes for the experiments they refuse to do/write up. So much so that the SEC has contacted me through the school in August the last two years to ask me to send them a fax/letter of confirmation for said students to say that they have done the experiments so the SEC can award them the full 10%. I have refused on both occasions.

It wouldn't be such a costly exercise to have external moderators for schools. There are approximately 700 secondary schools in the country. Granted some are bigger than others, but even if one extern was assigned to each school to go through the paperwork and assessment in a similar manner to FETAC, it would probably still work out far cheaper than the cost of administration and correction for the Junior Cert in its current format.

I used to correct JC Science way back when and there were at least 100 correctors alone for that subject. I assume that there are twice that number for English, Irish and Maths given that they are compulsory and have 2 papers etc.

whiteandlight · 17-03-2014 11:38pm

Here's one for the conspiracy forum but bear with me.
What if Quinns real purpose in pulling the SEC run terminal exam is so that they can increase the number of inspectors at LC. That would mean that they could shorte the correction period and lengthen the school year....

NB This is just a theory-I have heard nothing to substantiate it

rainbowtrout · 18-03-2014 12:01am

Musicmental85 wrote: »

Here's one for the conspiracy forum but bear with me.
What if Quinns real purpose in pulling the SEC run terminal exam is so that they can increase the number of inspectors at LC. That would mean that they could shorte the correction period and lengthen the school year....

NB This is just a theory-I have heard nothing to substantiate it

I don't think so. I wouldn't credit him with that level of intelligence. Also given that the government are 3 years into a 5 year term, i can't imagine he will be in Dept of Ed long enough to see it through. Doubling up the number of correctors, to half the time doesn't bring down the costs. Examiners still get paid per paper. There's still the same number of papers to correct.

He's just copying the UK, and no doubt if I'm still in teaching 20 years from now I'll be looking at junior cycle reforms from the government of the day saying internal assessment doesn't work for the JCSA and there should a terminal exam set by the SEC.

Pwpane · 18-03-2014 12:07am

rainbowtrout wrote: »

i must be the only science teacher in the country who refuses to let students tick the boxes for the experiments they refuse to do/write up. So much so that the SEC has contacted me through the school in August the last two years to ask me to send them a fax/letter of confirmation for said students to say that they have done the experiments so the SEC can award them the full 10%. I have refused on both occasions.

Indeed and you're not the only one! I've never had the SEC contact me though - they'd get an earful. This means they're complicit in the cheating.

rainbowtrout · 18-03-2014 12:26am

Pwpane wrote: »

Indeed and you're not the only one! I've never had the SEC contact me though - they'd get an earful. This means they're complicit in the cheating.

There should be some sort of sign off somewhere that allows a teacher/school to indicate that the student didn't complete the coursework, hence the unticked boxes.

evolving_doors · 18-03-2014 10:33am

rainbowtrout wrote: »

[...] So much so that the SEC has contacted me through the school in August the last two years to ask me to send them a fax/letter of confirmation for said students to say that they have done the experiments so the SEC can award them the full 10%. I have refused on both occasions.
[...]

Just to clarify... the SEC weren't specifically asking you to lie and falsely claim that they had done the work when they in fact hadn't... they were just making sure that the box hadn't been unticked in error!

Is that correct?

rainbowtrout · 18-03-2014 11:06am

Armelodie wrote: »

Just to clarify... the SEC weren't specifically asking you to lie and falsely claim that they had done the work when they in fact hadn't... they were just making sure that the box hadn't been unticked in error!

Is that correct?

ya that's right, but it should have been fairly obvious. It wasn't like the student had ticked the first page and forgotten the second. Specific experiments out of each of the three sections were ticked. It should have been fairly obvious that only certain ones were done.

The question on the phone to me should have been 'Are there boxes left unticked because the experiments were not completed?' rather than the assumption that my student forgot to tick the boxes.....

solerina · 18-03-2014 3:16pm

rainbowtrout wrote: »

i must be the only science teacher in the country who refuses to let students tick the boxes for the experiments they refuse to do/write up. So much so that the SEC has contacted me through the school in August the last two years to ask me to send them a fax/letter of confirmation for said students to say that they have done the experiments so the SEC can award them the full 10%. I have refused on both occasions.

It wouldn't be such a costly exercise to have external moderators for schools. There are approximately 700 secondary schools in the country. Granted some are bigger than others, but even if one extern was assigned to each school to go through the paperwork and assessment in a similar manner to FETAC, it would probably still work out far cheaper than the cost of administration and correction for the Junior Cert in its current format.

I used to correct JC Science way back when and there were at least 100 correctors alone for that subject. I assume that there are twice that number for English, Irish and Maths given that they are compulsory and have 2 papers etc.

I dont just let them tick the boxes either..however Im lucky in that most of the students have them covered anyway (or can add in two non mandatory)..if they are short a small number I let them come in over lunch and make them up...but I wont just let them tick the boxes !!

evolving_doors · 18-03-2014 4:39pm

rainbowtrout wrote: »

ya that's right, but it should have been fairly obvious. It wasn't like the student had ticked the first page and forgotten the second. Specific experiments out of each of the three sections were ticked. It should have been fairly obvious that only certain ones were done.

The question on the phone to me should have been 'Are there boxes left unticked because the experiments were not completed?' rather than the assumption that my student forgot to tick the boxes.....

Thanks for clarifying...

MrJones1973 · 18-03-2014 9:10pm

Simple JC reform
Dump the social engineering subjects-CSPE/SPHE-Kids will grow up to avoid voting -eat and drink whatever they like-a class a week aint going to change anything but leave SEX ED-they listn to that .

Allow Subjects with two Papers to do one Paper in second year-it can be supervised in house and sent off, Reduces stress etc Could be extended in other subjects that split easily.

rainbowtrout · 18-03-2014 9:10pm

solerina wrote: »

I dont just let them tick the boxes either..however Im lucky in that most of the students have them covered anyway (or can add in two non mandatory)..if they are short a small number I let them come in over lunch and make them up...but I wont just let them tick the boxes !!

Ya I go through all that as well and it's torture, it's only the last two years that I've had non compliance from a couple of students. And in the end I said to hell with this, I've given up lots of free time for this and they've been given every opportunity in the world and the same as all the other students and are still refusing to do it, so they're not getting the marks.

implausible · 18-03-2014 10:47pm

External moderation is a must to avoid some of the issues raised above and then some:

It would give some importance to the work done by students, if they know that their work will be looked over by someone else other than the teacher
It would ensure a national standard
It will reassure teachers in their marking and as to the genuine ability of their students
It would function as a safeguard against grade inflation and teachers not marking work properly or taking shortcuts.

Every year I go through the FETAC external moderation system and while it may be nerve-wracking at times, you get reassurance that you're delivering the modules correctly and confirmation of the accuracy of your marking. The extern does not mark everything, just a sample. There's no reason (other than money obviously) that an examiner couldn't spend the 3 1/2 weeks, that would ordinarily be spent marking, travelling to a school a day and randomly sampling and moderating work.

Pwpane · 18-03-2014 10:52pm

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Ya I go through all that as well and it's torture, it's only the last two years that I've had non compliance from a couple of students. And in the end I said to hell with this, I've given up lots of free time for this and they've been given every opportunity in the world and the same as all the other students and are still refusing to do it, so they're not getting the marks.

I think we all (science teachers anyway) get caught up in this, trying to squeeze the square peg through the round hole.

I figure if we were setting the course and marking it too, that we wouldn't be so anxious to force them through - that we'd want to see them prove themselves and motivation to complete work would then be a factor in results. I'd certainly be putting penalties on late work without a good excuse, for example. This is one way that assessing our own students would be an improvement.

On the other hand, I do know people who increase students' marks in house exams when they feel sorry for them.

spurious · 18-03-2014 11:02pm

Pwpane wrote: »

On the other hand, I do know people who increase students' marks in house exams when they feel sorry for them.

In some cases, a slightly increased mark in a house exam might be the difference between a child showing up for the real exam or not and I certainly did it myself on occasion (with the desired result) but as a general rule I wouldn't have done it.

RealJohn · 19-03-2014 1:10pm

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet but has happened to me in one school was that the principal 'encouraged' me to provide as much 'assistance' to the third year science students as I could in order to maximise their marks in their projects. I doubt he's the only principal in the country who'd do this and I imagine that a lot of teachers, particularly those without job security, would allow their principles to be more flexible in order to ingratiate themselves with management.

Clearly this would likely be a minority but I suspect that it might be a significant minority.

rainbowtrout · 19-03-2014 1:13pm

RealJohn wrote: »

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet but has happened to me in one school was that the principal 'encouraged' me to provide as much 'assistance' to the third year science students as I could in order to maximise their marks in their projects. I doubt he's the only principal in the country who'd do this and I imagine that a lot of teachers, particularly those without job security, would allow their principles to be more flexible in order to ingratiate themselves with management.

Clearly this would likely be a minority but I suspect that it might be a significant minority.

It can be an issue in grind schools too, mainly at LC level where they are selling themselves on churning out top grades and students have paid 7k to be there for the year. I can imagine that it happens at JC level too.

derb12 · 19-03-2014 4:20pm

As a teacher and a parent I consider that the impartial assessment of students at this stage of their education is really important. It doesn't have to be 100% of their mark. It doesn't have to be in a terminal exam. But it must be anonymous and objective.
Ruairi Quinn's mantra that the JC "is not fit for purpose" seems to just go unchallenged in the media, and any objections from the teaching profession seem to be generally regarded as teachers simply protecting their conditions and not based on the best outcome for students. This is truly frustrating.
My daughter is doing her JC this year. She isn't a bad student but she has two teachers she "dislikes". All the mediocre grades they have ever given her have been like water off a duck's back. But when she got the same mediocre grade from an external examiner in her mocks last week she changed her tune! I firmly believe that she would have happily continued on to LC with the false notion that "Miss X has it in for me" or "Mr Y never gives As" if it wasn't for the objective assessment she got from someone who didn't know her from Adam.

MrJones1973 · 22-03-2014 2:53pm

Can anyone tell me has the TUI balloted yet??

rainbowtrout · 22-03-2014 3:00pm

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me has the TUI balloted yet??

Yes, we got ballot papers this week about industrial action.

acequion · 22-03-2014 3:22pm

RealJohn wrote: »

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet but has happened to me in one school was that the principal 'encouraged' me to provide as much 'assistance' to the third year science students as I could in order to maximise their marks in their projects. I doubt he's the only principal in the country who'd do this and I imagine that a lot of teachers, particularly those without job security, would allow their principles to be more flexible in order to ingratiate themselves with management.

Clearly this would likely be a minority but I suspect that it might be a significant minority.

I wouldn't be too sure at all that it would be a minority RealJohn! If the pressure is on from all around to give good grades and the Dept, whose job it is to protect the integrity of the system,doesn't really care any more because external assessment is gone, how many teachers do you see sticking to their principles and not yielding to pressure? Can you say with 100% sincerity that you won't? Because I can't.

RealJohn · 23-03-2014 6:31pm

acequion wrote: »

I wouldn't be too sure at all that it would be a minority RealJohn! If the pressure is on from all around to give good grades and the Dept, whose job it is to protect the integrity of the system,doesn't really care any more because external assessment is gone, how many teachers do you see sticking to their principles and not yielding to pressure? Can you say with 100% sincerity that you won't? Because I can't.

I'm permanent and teach more maths than science (and am one of the few qualified maths teachers in the school). I'm in a position to just say no (or if I'm honest, I'd probably agree to do it and then not actually do it, much as I did when in my above example). You're right though that there'll be more and more pressure from management to ensure high marks.

Benicetomonty · 07-04-2014 5:17pm

Ed Walsh and TUI's McGabhan on Newstalk breakfast this morning. If Ruairi Quinn is depending on Mr Walsh's debating skills to carry public favour, the unions might actually have a chance. His argument: teachers are all underworked, overpaid and (probably) oversexed whiners, dead set against change of any kind
Q: what about concerns over assessment
A: nonsense. Unions are bad. Minister is great.

evolving_doors · 07-04-2014 6:19pm

Benicetomonty wrote: »

Ed Walsh and TUI's McGabhan on Newstalk breakfast this morning. If Ruairi Quinn is depending on Mr Walsh's debating skills to carry public favour, the unions might actually have a chance. His argument: teachers are all underworked, overpaid and (probably) oversexed whiners, dead set against change of any kind
Q: what about concerns over assessment
A: nonsense. Unions are bad. Minister is great.

Ed. Walsh is a known teacher basher. Its telling that hes rarely asked for an opinion on lecturing methods in the 3rd level system.

Tell him get back to his nuclear power advocacy job and stop the bandwagoning teacher bashing...its getting old.

Again today George Hook called it spot on and stuck to the facts. Ruari was saying his door is always open for consultation... Hook says that he should have engaged in it first if that was the case rather than ramming it down everyones throats first.

MrJones1973 · 17-04-2014 9:32am

Over sexed? Really?!

evolving_doors · 17-04-2014 3:35pm

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Over sexed? Really?!

Ed Walsh is just jealous of our exuberant nature, he needs nuclear power to help him.

I wonder is he any relation to that parent I had in giving out about teachers going off on maternity leave... Soo inconsiderate.

doc_17 · 17-04-2014 6:31pm

Ah here...I don't think anyone takes Ed seriously anyway. I think it's only Newstalk that have him on now anyway.

endakenny · 17-04-2014 10:38pm

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/parents-will-trust-teachers-to-assess-junior-cert-papers-30176134.html

Education Minister Ruairi Quinn has ruled out any row back on abolishing the traditional Junior Cert, but he confirmed in the Dail that discussions are continuing about a system of external moderation of assessments carried out in schools, as a quality assurance measure.

Junior Cert Reform

Comments