Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

junior cert science reform

Options
  • 24-05-2014 6:29pm
    #1
    km79
    Registered Users Posts: 48,132 ✭✭✭✭


    Anyone got any info on proposed new course details......


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Crazyteacher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,438 ✭✭✭Crazyteacher


    km79 wrote: »
    Anyone got any info on proposed new course details......

    That's all there is about it so far

    http://www.juniorcycle.ie/Curriculum/Subjects/Science/Science


  • Options
    #3
    MrJones1973
    Closed Accounts Posts: 997 ✭✭✭MrJones1973


    No ASTI/ TUI science teacher should be going to inservice or partaking in planning for Science. Look up a wwebsite by all means but to have a meeting or start writing a plan is a breach of directive.


  • Options
    #4
    km79
    Registered Users Posts: 48,132 ✭✭✭✭km79


    Mrwhite1970 wrote: »
    No ASTI/ TUI science teacher should be going to inservice or partaking in planning for Science. Look up a wwebsite by all means but to have a meeting or start writing a plan is a breach of directive.

    Correct.and no teachers should be signed up for such by principals who are union members and yet........we are "all in it together " when it suits them......
    What I'm looking for anyway is the proposed curriculum from the NCCA . I believe their is a draft document following a meeting late April and it does not make pretty reading apparently :-(


  • Options
    #5
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Mrwhite1970 wrote: »
    No ASTI/ TUI science teacher should be going to inservice or partaking in planning for Science. Look up a wwebsite by all means but to have a meeting or start writing a plan is a breach of directive.

    What if the inservice has nothing to do with new JCSA, are all subject inservices a no go now? Just suppose it's for general teaching methodologies.. I thought the directive had just to do with co-operation with jcsa.

    Apologies in advance but I never read the directive as I thought I had understood it from talking to other teachers and listening to news etc. Ill have a look tomorrow though (on crappy phone now).


  • Options
    #6
    seavill
    Registered Users Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭seavill


    Inservice is fine just none on JCSA

    We had one a few weeks back (tech subjects) and it was mentioned as "that which cannot be discussed" so they don't cover anything about it on the courses now because of the union positions


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    MrJones1973
    Closed Accounts Posts: 997 ✭✭✭MrJones1973


    Armelodie wrote: »
    What if the inservice has nothing to do with new JCSA, are all subject inservices a no go now? Just suppose it's for general teaching methodologies.. I thought the directive had just to do with co-operation with jcsa.

    Apologies in advance but I never read the directive as I thought I had understood it from talking to other teachers and listening to news etc. Ill have a look tomorrow though (on crappy phone now).

    You can go to an inservice on anything but Jc but I cant see Department running inservices for anything but Jc at moment. If a Principal collects names-he/she is in breach of directive. Pure and Simple. If you give names both of you are in breach of rule 104 and open to expulsion from ASTI


  • Options
    #8
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Mrwhite1970 wrote: »
    You can go to an inservice on anything but Jc but I cant see Department running inservices for anything but Jc at moment. If a Principal collects names-he/she is in breach of directive. Pure and Simple. If you give names both of you are in breach of rule 104 and open to expulsion from ASTI

    Even if its pertinent to the 'old' JC?


  • Options
    #9
    Crazyteacher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,438 ✭✭✭Crazyteacher


    Even if it is old JC , they won't be able to go through anything without mentioning the words junior cycle. So it would be still a breach of the directive.


  • Options
    #10
    teacherhead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 666 ✭✭✭teacherhead


    Mrwhite1970 wrote: »
    You can go to an inservice on anything but Jc but I cant see Department running inservices for anything but Jc at moment. If a Principal collects names-he/she is in breach of directive. Pure and Simple. If you give names both of you are in breach of rule 104 and open to expulsion from ASTI

    collects names?


  • Options
    #11
    RealJohn
    Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    I haven't been offered any science inservice during school time in several years (and it was quite regular when I started teaching) so I think it can be safely assumed that any science inservice during school time anytime soon is aimed at the new junior cycle, whether they admit it or not and should not be attended or cooperated with.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    MrJones1973
    Closed Accounts Posts: 997 ✭✭✭MrJones1973


    If a principal asks for your teaching council number for a science in service then you must reply that to give such information would be in breach of directive. Trust me this was debated at length CEC-read the directives. We are educated people. It aint rocket science!


  • Options
    #13
    Peter Flynt
    Registered Users Posts: 2,812 ✭✭✭Peter Flynt


    I left the ASTI the day after the third Haddington Road/Croke Park ballot. . . The ballot where King and co went out seeking a YES vote without a mandate to do so.

    There was no union solidarity from them then and they were the leaders of the union.

    Science Inservices begin next academic year and I'll be seeking to go.


  • Options
    #14
    RealJohn
    Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    With all due respect Peter, I don't think that that sort of attitude helps anyone. Union or not, JC 'reform' (read: money saving) is bad for teachers in its proposed form and we should do nothing to support it.


  • Options
    #15
    km79
    Registered Users Posts: 48,132 ✭✭✭✭km79


    Quinn's position is weakening by the day. He has now decided he does want to have talks with the union ......wonder why!
    IMO if we can hang tough until August this will all be postponed ......


  • Options
    #16
    MrJones1973
    Closed Accounts Posts: 997 ✭✭✭MrJones1973


    Peter -what point are you making by going to In service?


  • Options
    #17
    Teachm
    Registered Users Posts: 45 ✭Teachm


    I agree with km79.doubt Quinn will be there much longer.also national parents association are not happy with proposed assessment and no national certification.i for one will not break union directive and had to point this out to other science teachers recently when she was planning to send our details on for in service.


  • Options
    #18
    paul0103
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭paul0103


    RealJohn wrote: »
    With all due respect Peter, I don't think that that sort of attitude helps anyone. Union or not, JC 'reform' (read: money saving) is bad for teachers in its proposed form and we should do nothing to support it.

    And what about students? I'll admit I'm not up to date with the ins and outs of teacher and union politics, but I find it disheartening that nowhere in this thread has anybody discussed or even speculated if science reform will be beneficial to students.


  • Options
    #19
    Teachm
    Registered Users Posts: 45 ✭Teachm


    The students definitely need the experience of a state certified exam to prepare them for leaving cert.the jump from junior to leaving is already too much for a lot and I cant imagine how they will cope in future.no doubt change is needed but such radical change without. Proper inset and training is detrimental to students.english teachers that I work with have said in service for new jcert was a joke and a waste of money.


  • Options
    #20
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    paul0103 wrote: »
    And what about students? I'll admit I'm not up to date with the ins and outs of teacher and union politics, but I find it disheartening that nowhere in this thread has anybody discussed or even speculated if science reform will be beneficial to students.

    I think you have to separate out the issue of JC reform (which is what this thread has ended up discussing due to the recent actions) and the proposed 'new' science curriculum.. which won't be out until sept. 2014. (if even). If you want to click on the link in post 2 you can read the background documents, which tbh is just a bunch of musings.

    So to speculate on an imaginary science reform program is like speculating on the benefits that next weeks lotto numbers will have on my life.

    Since Ruairi started there has always the implication that everything teachers do is wrong and reform is the only way forward. Reform into what though, he sure as hell doesn't have a clue apart from buzzword bingo.


  • Options
    #21
    RealJohn
    Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    paul0103 wrote: »
    And what about students? I'll admit I'm not up to date with the ins and outs of teacher and union politics, but I find it disheartening that nowhere in this thread has anybody discussed or even speculated if science reform will be beneficial to students.
    If it's rushed through like they're already trying to do with english then it's bad for students too but if the reforms are anything like the last set of reforms, they'll be bad for students too. The current syllabus (which is only in ten years - a relatively new course) is full of nice ideas which have been implemented very poorly which ultimately, is of little benefit to the students.

    Regardless, as a general rule, if it's bad for teachers, it's bad for students. Happy teachers are going to be better at their job which is better for the students. Also, teachers don't oppose things just for the sake of it. We oppose things with the best interests of the students at heart. I'd love to see them get rid of the current junior cert science course to be honest but only if they replace it with something better and I have no faith in the powers that be doing that right now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Teachm
    Registered Users Posts: 45 ✭Teachm


    The Irish science teachers association commissioned an expert to look at the proposed curricula for leaving cert physics,biology and chemistry and her report which can be found on ISTA website is quiet worrying.also lots of contributions on the proposed physics syllabus on Ncca website also .by all means make the changes but for correct reasons and in a planned and considered way.project Maths has some value but I still saw excellent students crying after paper one.


  • Options
    #23
    RealJohn
    Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    Not really on topic but I thought paper 1 was grand and paper 2 looks to have been alright too, though I haven't gone through it properly yet.
    The idea of project maths is good but everything about the implementation has been awful from day one and so far, it's looking like junior cert reform is going to be no better.


  • Options
    #24
    Pwpane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭Pwpane


    RealJohn wrote: »
    If it's rushed through like they're already trying to do with english then it's bad for students too but if the reforms are anything like the last set of reforms, they'll be bad for students too. The current syllabus (which is only in ten years - a relatively new course) is full of nice ideas which have been implemented very poorly which ultimately, is of little benefit to the students.

    Regardless, as a general rule, if it's bad for teachers, it's bad for students. Happy teachers are going to be better at their job which is better for the students. Also, teachers don't oppose things just for the sake of it. We oppose things with the best interests of the students at heart. I'd love to see them get rid of the current junior cert science course to be honest but only if they replace it with something better and I have no faith in the powers that be doing that right now.
    The superficiality in the current course is dreadful. The students don't learn enough about anything to appreciate the beauty of it. Also, the investigations take up so much time that could be useful for learning more important material in more depth that it's very frustrating. The kick in the teeth is that much of the investigations' write-up is copied from the internet and/or written by family members (and teachers) and so the marking is totally unfair.


  • Options
    #25
    Belbrit
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭Belbrit


    I believe it is planned that the draft science spec will be going for public consultation this October!


Advertisement