The "memorisation / regurgitation vs. understanding / thinking" debate revisited!

Halla Basin

Halla Basin wrote: »

The Leaving Cert exists for you to get points. The exams exist for points. Learning off answers increases your points.

Simples.

I wouldn't trade an increase in points for a decrease in originality, but hey, I'm just a believer in actually getting an education.

randylonghorn

Halla Basin wrote: »

The Leaving Cert exists for you to get points. The exams exist for points.

The problem though is that that's not supposed to be the purpose of the LC.

The purpose of the LC is supposed to be to further your education.

Stev_o

Think it's incredibly harsh, "learning off" answers isn't easy it requires time and effort to do, it isn't something that's a night before job that guarantees you a A1 (unless you have a photographic memory). The fact is you won't go into a exam with a random facts in your head and make it up on the day it's just not possible.

For geography especially i spent hours and many A4 pads getting to grips with sample essays provided which contained well over the required of amount of SRP's, my answer will differ from the person next to me dew to order of SRP's phrasing etc.

I mean come on the LC isn't a thinking exam, it's 2/3 hours in which you have to spit back up what you'v learned over 2 years. There's no fooling around you have to hit the ground running.

Look it's not a general knowledge exam nor is it a exam to invite peoples originality, some people will say that English allows originality but i bet that the people that got high marks in Paper one had the spine of their essays already prepared for what could come up.

If certain people like to think that people who have gone to grind schools and "learned off" answers are cheats and are lazy gits well then I strongly disagree because we'v put in just the amount of effort, slog and work that every other student in the country has done.

/rant.

JC 2K3

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

In college the subjects you study will (hopefully) interest you and you'll be more willing to do your own research.

That's what you think.

College is full of wasters who bluffed their way through their LC, getting high points and then end up barely scraping through or failing.

Personally, I don't think the LC is flawed or "a joke". No one ever offers any explanation for comments like these besides "sure it's just a big memory test" or "it's just a points race".

I learned a huge amount in each subject I did. In some subjects, teachers gave us notes to learn off. Which I disagree with. I'd stopped writing down notes the teacher wrote on the board in English by half way through 5th year, and generally disregarded them in Irish (all Irish school, so Irish and English were fairly equivalent subjects, just in different languages). In Chemistry and Physics, although I could have gotten high marks in the exam by learning off answers to past papers or whatever, I didn't. I painstakingly googled, wiki'd or asked my teacher if I couldn't understand a section properly. In Maths and App Maths I made 100% sure I understood the fundamentals of any new concept before attempting more difficult questions.

I came out with 580 and tbqfh, though the above sounds like I worked endlessly, I honestly believe I did much, much less work than anyone who got high points through rote learning without bothering to understand.

Why? Well because once you understand something, you don't need to learn off the textbook answers. And once you're in the mindset of learning how things work instead of rote learning answers and forming your own opinions for essays and questions in English and Irish, it becomes second nature. It's a skill you will carry with you for the rest of your life. A magical switch doesn't flick in college. Just because you've more of an interest in your course than the LC doesn't mean you'll be able to automatically change your learning style.

I think the pressure surrounding the whole CAO points system, the fact that the LC can be subverted by the less intelligent through vigourous memorisation, and the fact that teachers acknowledge this and actively encourage this undermines the LC, but I still think that with the right mindset, there's a huge amount to learn from it and it can be hugely beneficial if undertaken in the right way.

Halla Basin

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I wouldn't trade an increase in points for a decrease in originality, but hey, I'm just a believer in actually getting an education.

Do you mean the originality of the answers? Why should that matter? No matter how much effort you put into understanding and thinking, chances are your answers are going to be the exact same as the answers of a large proportion of the other 50,000 people sitting the exam. You're never going to make any new and exciting discoveries during your LC.

And don't get me wrong, I'm all for understanding the course and actually knowing what it is you're banging on about. You know? That's great! But it isn't worth anything if you don't get the points. Sure, you'll get that warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that you didn't cheat the system, but warm and fuzzy feelings don't get you a job/college course. Points do.

randylonghorn wrote: »

The problem though is that that's not supposed to be the purpose of the LC.

The purpose of the LC is supposed to be to further your education.

I'd argue that the purpose of the Leaving Cert is to provide a marker for how hard you can work and how dedicated you are. The purpose of the Leaving Cert Cycle is to further your education. Well, supposed to be :P

Lawliet

Stev_o wrote: »

If certain people like to think that people who have gone to grind schools and "learned off" answers are cheats and are lazy gits well then I strongly disagree because we'v put in just the amount of effort, slog and work that every other student in the country has done.

/rant.

Not if you've been giving a prepared answer by a teacher and learned it off, and every other student has actually researched and prepared their own answers and also learned them off. I think it's pretty obvious in that case who's put in more effort.

leesmom

Lawliet wrote: »

Not if you've been giving a prepared answer by a teacher and learned it off, and every other student has actually researched and prepared their own answers and also learned them off. I think it's pretty obvious in that case who's put in more effort.

as opposed to taking your srps from a revision book

RandomIrl

leesmom wrote: »

as opposed to taking your srps from a revision book

i think the point is that the student has researched it, put in the effort, finding information from class notes, revision books, text books, the internet.
than sitting down to learn something that has just been handed to you..

who deserves the points more,

the person who sits down plans, researches, writes essays, gets them corrected by teachers and then learns them.
OR
the person who's handed a full marks question and learns it.

leesmom

RandomIrl wrote: »

i think the point is that the student has researched it, put in the effort, finding information from class notes, revision books, text books, the internet.
than sitting down to learn something that has just been handed to you..

who deserves the points more,

the person who sits down plans, researches, writes essays, gets them corrected by teachers and then learns them.
OR
the person who's handed a full marks question and learns it.

what if your teacher does not want to correct your own essays ?

RandomIrl

IMO,any teacher who will go to the trouble of preparing essays, wont have a problem correcting something you give them, i would be very very surprised if they said no.



edit, you didnt answer my question!!!:P

Lawliet

leesmom wrote: »

what if your teacher does not want to correct your own essays ?

In my experience teachers love students who hand up extra work! I can't see any decent teacher point blank refusing to correct an essay for you, most teachers will go out of their way to help you with things like this
...well...provided you haven't spent the last few years acting the twat in their class!

leesmom

leesmom wrote: »

what if your teacher does not want to correct your own essays ?

Then they're not a very good teacher.

whadabouchasir

randylonghorn wrote: »

The problem though is that that's not supposed to be the purpose of the LC.

The purpose of the LC is supposed to be to further your education.

They surely are going the wrong way about it then I think that they need to make the exams a lot more unpredictable to stop all of this learning entire essays off by heart crap.Sometimes the exams are just too predictable like this years Irish aiste.For f**ck sake everyone had that one learned verbatum,yet they still gave it.

SligoBrewer

whadabouchasir wrote: »

They surely are going the wrong way about it then I think that they need to make the exams a lot more unpredictable to stop all of this learning entire essays off by heart crap.Sometimes the exams are just too predictable like this years Irish aiste.For f**ck sake everyone had that one learned verbatum,yet they still gave it.

I couldn't agree more with this.
Of all topics, the culu, phrased so a foundation student could have stuck in a learned essay.

randylonghorn

Halla Basin wrote: »

And don't get me wrong, I'm all for understanding the course and actually knowing what it is you're banging on about. You know? That's great! But it isn't worth anything if you don't get the points.

People who understand the stuff normally do very well though ... and adapt much better to unexpected questions on the paper.

Halla Basin wrote: »

I'd argue that the purpose of the Leaving Cert is to provide a marker for how hard you can work and how dedicated you are.

In fairness I wouldn't actually disagree on that aspect.

Halla Basin wrote: »

The purpose of the Leaving Cert Cycle is to further your education. Well, supposed to be :P

I understand the distinction you're making, and you have a point. The reality is though that how it's examined impacts hugely on how it's taught, and how students approach it ... and this thread at least proves that much!!

whadabouchasir wrote: »

They surely are going the wrong way about it then I think that they need to make the exams a lot more unpredictable to stop all of this learning entire essays off by heart crap..

Agreed.

Dman001

I learnt off English notes and changed them ever so slightly on the day and I got a C2 in Higher level English and I was delighted.

I was weak at English and I thought learning off notes was the best way to go for me. But after coming out of the English exam I thought it went terrible and I was sure I got a D in it because I barely changed the notes to suit the question asked. But it worked out well for me.

After my experience, I would recommend to learn off notes as it made me feel more prepared for the exam ahead. I am also very slow at writing and it helped in that way too. In the mocks, I got something like 45% in English and I only learnt off notes on the Comparitive.

Edit: Those against the idea of learning off notes. Personally, I hated English and I will never put anything I learnt in English (except the grammer side of things) to good use. MacBeth, poetry and the novels were all a waste of time for me. I only wanted to do Higher English for the points. Anyone is free to learn off notes for the LC but the correcter may see that you have learnt off notes and your grade you go down because of this. For me, it was totally worth the risk because if I hadn't learnt off notes I would have got a D easily.

whadabouchasir

Dman001 wrote: »

I learnt off English notes and changed them ever so slightly on the day and I got a C2 in Higher level English and I was delighted.

Personally I don't think that you should get any marks for learning off notes in english.What's the point in memorising piles of notes on poets and essays if you don't answer the question and give your own opinion?This is supposed to be the whole point of LC english,to give your own response and opinion,not your teachers.If you can give your own honest opinion on boards why not do it in the exam?

Dman001

whadabouchasir wrote: »

Personally I don't think that you should get any marks for learning off notes in english.What's the point in memorising piles of notes on poets and essays if you don't answer the question and give your own opinion?This is supposed to be the whole point of LC english,to give your own response and opinion,not your teachers.If you can give your own honest opinion on boards why not do it in the exam?

If I gave my own opinion I would of got a D.:)

My problem wasn't giving my opinion on a poem but my terming and use of words/grammer. Your fighting for every point in the LC and who cares what you do to get the points. It isn't cheating because everyone is free to do it. I'm not gonna give my own opinion on MacBeth or a poem on the day of the English exam because it pleases the examiner.

I think that if you have an interest in English or whatever subject and if you are good at it, there won't be a need to learn off notes. Like I said, I hated English and at the end of the day the only person who lost out because of learning of notes was myself and I'm okay with that.

lou91

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

TBH i think you need a balance between the two to get on well in the leavin.

This.
I got an A1 in Geography and Business using one simple method - taking my notes and writing them out again. And again. And again. Until I could list the points off verbatim without looking at the page. Lots of memorisation/regurgitation.

I got an A1 in Maths and English by understanding concepts, practising different questions, thinking of different personal essay titles I could use etc. Some understanding/thinking required here.

Neither method is more or less superior than the other; it all depends on the subject.

MmmmmCheese

So what most people are saying here is that if your teacher hands you out perfect notes you should completely disregard them and go off and make your own? I'm sorry but i don't know where all of you were getting the time to do this because i had enough on my plate as it was.

As for the plagerism thing.....its geography. The points in the essays written by the teacher are fact. If the subject was something like English then i would understand completely what you're talking about as english is all about creativity.

ALincoln

It's not so much plagiarism as it is morally reprehensible laziness and abject academic automatism, that's what bothers people.

And the LC's inherent flaw has been exposed by the hpat - people who may previously engaged in hackology and garnered 580 or 590 are now not given precedence ahead of intelligent people who "only" get 550, but possess a superior ability to adapt well to IQ and non traditional formats of examination.

Lawliet

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

So what most people are saying here is that if your teacher hands you out perfect notes you should completely disregard them and go off and make your own? I'm sorry but i don't know where all of you were getting the time to do this because i had enough on my plate as it was.

Not disregard them but use them as a starting point for your own essay.

Besides it's much easier to learn something that's your own work and the extra effort will stand to you in the end.

randylonghorn

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

So what most people are saying here is that if your teacher hands you out perfect notes you should completely disregard them and go off and make your own?

Actually, I don't think anyone said that!

Good notes are always useful, just like good textbooks, by all means use them.

There's a difference between that and learning off essays which someone else has prepared for you, and regurgitating them and passing them off as your own.

Apart altogether from the moral issues, what has been pointed out again and again is that unless they were prepared for you and for you alone, there is a reasonable chance that the examiner will cop on.

spurious

It is relatively easy for the SEC to set exam questions with a twist in them to thwart the learning off brigade.

Spew out the learned off stuff without direct reference to the question asked and you could lose up to 75% of the marks, depending on the way the question is worded. I have no idea whether this is likely, but it would be easy to do.

The Chief Examiner's reports are always interesting in terms of what the examiners report from their correcting.