'Grade inflation' in exam results investigation

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Hagar

Does it never occur to these people that students are working harder to try to secure one of the woefully inadequate number of 3rd Level places?

Lockstep

Just hope my 1;1 doesn't get downgraded.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

seamus

I don't think there's been any specific conspiracy in this country to increase grades over the last 30 years, it's just been a symptom of a growing economy and syllabi that can't cope.

The Leaving Cert in particular is a perfect example of a system that can be legally cheated. The non-analytical subjects, such as English and so forth have seen increases in grades because the entire exam can be learned off by rote and spat back onto a piece of paper. You can literally learn off the correct answers, word-for-word, without having ever performed the critical analysis yourself, and walk away with high marks.

It's in maths and science that this trend has been exposed - numbers and the quality of grades has collapsed in these subjects because you can't learn the answers off by rote. You can learn the *process* off by rote (in fact, this is ideal), but when it comes to sitting down and doing the exam, you must perform the analysis and calculations on the spot. And many people fall down in this because the entire education system, along with their parents, has pushed them to fill their minds with specific knowledge and ignore general processes.

The employers in question aren't complaining that the graduates are underqualified so much as the are lacking in common sense and general skills. And this is a symptom of promoting knowledge above analysis.
Somehow being able to recite 6 higher English poems from the top of your head has become important enough to get you more points than knowing how to do long division, but in the real world, it's the latter that's more valuable - maybe not the actual process itself of long division, but the *template* that it provides to allow people to analyse and adapt to changing situations.

seithon

I don't want this to sound like I'm bragging here.. but my own experience is this.
I'm in collage as a mature student having left education before my junior cert of all things, I started in a class that started off with 30 young fresh leaving certified folk... when I enter 3rd year in my collage their will only be 6 of us, the rest having failed for some very stupid reasons.

A number of my classmates simply can't handle concepts of common sense or analytical thinking etc required by a computing course and it shows. I honestly get the feeling that their extra 4 or 5 years education in secondary school have not prepared them one iota for the course.

gizmo555

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

69 wrote: »

Does it never occur to these people that students are working harder to try to secure one of the woefully inadequate number of 3rd Level places?

Do you seriously believe that? That students today are 5 times more likely to get a a perfect Leaving or 3 times more likely to get a 1st on their university finals than only fifteen years ago, just because they work harder? And if you do believe that, how can you reconcile it with the complaints made in the article by the likes of Google about the declining standards of Irish graduates?

gandalf

Well this leaves us with a big problem. For years we have been fed the line along with external investors that our education system was one of the best in the world.

The either need to provide evidence that this is the case or present how as a country we are going to ensure the standards are up to par and delivering what companies need.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

I believe that the LC is very tough, because of the fith for college places on a ridicolous points system. And I do think that it is fair to say that it needs a complete overhaul.

As for grade inflation, I am unsure if this can be so regarding LC as there is such a fight for these places.

However, once a college place is secured it is all downhill in my experiences. I have seen people who are doing engineering or science struggle and this is usually down to maths subjects that they are having difficulty with, which is why I (and everyone) believes that maths at school needs to be improved.

But I personally have a B.A. and an LL.B. which were pretty easy to obtain tbh, the LC was a lot more difficult. We were usually told what topics were coming up in the exams and would only study them.

Did I have a well rounded knowledge coming out of college? Not in the slightest, if it were not for the fact that I sat my FE-1's my knowledge would be patchy to say the least.

So, imo I certainly think that our colleges are degree making factories and if we want to be taken seriously, a significant overhaul is needed.

Laminations

DF, do you think you earned your degree, 2 masters and PhD? or were they handed to you? its very easy to say other people are not deserving of their qualifications but that you (through hard work) managed to get to the top. I do agree that there is grade inflation but saying things like 'but you can dumb down the syllabi' surely lessens the worth of your qualifications? Did people make it easier for you to pass?

seamus

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That I won't disagree with. I sat my LC ten years ago and I can remember going through past papers then, where anything from 1994 or previous seemed to be noticeably harder than more recent papers. However, the harder papers also had more ambiguous wording and obscure requirements, whereas the more recent ones weren't so eager to ask trick questions. That could reflect a change in syllabus, or a change in attitudes and some attempt to make the questions "fairer" for weaker students.
Honourable as it may be, it blurs the line between weaker and stronger students.

But this would be the very definition of "underqualified," surely? I know people who hold degrees in English from Irish universities, and yet they cannot write grammatically correct sentences, or even distinguish between words such as "affect" and "effect." If someone holds a "degree," and yet does not have eve the basic skills that should accompany such a degree, then the degree becomes meaningless.

Well, I don't think we're necessarily disagreeing - someone who's "qualified" on paper with a 2.1 or even a 1.1 degree isn't necessarily someone who's capable or even competent for the role which they've applied, even though they meet the criteria perfectly.
In my field, I often meet people who are far more "qualified" than I, whether it be university or proprietary qualifications, whom I have to hand-hold through what should be basic knowledge with their skills.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

rightwingdub

I did my leaving cert in 1999 and I did notice when looking at the Maths papers from 1994 onwards that they did get noticeably easier, same with the French course when the new syllabus was examined for the first time in 1997, however, the history paper was very difficult in 1999 compared to previous, mind you I still got an A2.

Donegalfella, your right about higher maths the pre 1994 papers were a lot more difficult than the post 94 papers, I don't think I would have done higher level maths if the course hadn't been dumbed down in the mid 90's, also Isn't it government policy to try and get 25% of LC students to do the higher level maths paper but its =only about 18% at the moment.

seamus

rightwingdub wrote: »

Donegalfella, your right about higher maths the pre 1994 papers were a lot more difficult than the post 94 papers, I don't think I would have done higher level maths if the course hadn't been dumbed down in the mid 90's, also Isn't it government policy to try and get 25% of LC students to do the higher level maths paper but its =only about 18% at the moment.

I think this is the problem. The papers are made a little easier to try and encourage students to take the higher papers, however the problem isn't so much that the students think that maths is difficult, it's just not seen as somewhere that points can be easily attained. So students instead focus on the "by rote" subjects where a grade is easier to guarantee and do ordinary level maths purely to satisfy the requirement to pass it to complete the leaving.

I've always thought that while the CAO system was simple and transparent, that's also its downfall - it doesn't select students on the basis of their suitability for a course.
Someone could do three science subjects and 4 arts subjects at leaving cert level, barely scraping through the science subjects and still getting into a course teaching a scientific discipline. But the guy who get B1s in science subjects and fails Irish won't get into a science course for which he is amply capable.

I would favour moving towards a system where colleges can specify the minimum requirements (in terms of subjects and grades) for each course and applicants then fill out their application form on the basis of which subjects they are studying at LC level. Scrap any "minimum pass" requirements. Who cares if a student has failed Irish or English and wants to be an engineer?

Time Magazine

Maybe we should do our own analysis of the difficulty of the papers.

Although I got an A1 in English back in the day (yep, I'm saying that just to boast ) I'd be a poor assessor of the difficulty of the exams. Donegallfella, you studied English, right? Care to back up the claim that the paper has become easier?

I have taught Maths so I will go through a few papers and compare the difficulty. The papers online go back to 1996 which isn't ideal, but it was still 14 years ago. I'll compare the 1996, 1999, 2006 and 2009 papers in terms of difficulty if you will too?

Eliot Rosewater

As regards Maths, people may be interested in the new government Project Maths scheme, which is working towards a new curriculum asfaik. There was a thread in the Maths forum about it, and a link was given to a sample paper of what could be the new exam (pdf). From what I gather they are proposing the removal of matrices and vectors, which is nothing less than insanity. A lot of people over in the Maths forum felt that the paper certainly was "dumbing down" the LC.

People may also be aware that the Department of Education introduced new log tables this year. These log tables contain literally every formula on the course, from the root of quadratics to sum of series. I don't think you can argue with the fact that these new log tables make it easier.

When I was told about them the person telling me said that perhaps the Department would now be able to make the questions harder. But this isn't going to happen. What the Department is interested in is looking good on paper, and even if that involves creating a generation of substandard mathematicians its seems like it will still happen.

entropic

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

People may also be aware that the Department of Education introduced new log tables this year. These log tables contain literally every formula on the course, from the root of quadratics to sum of series. I don't think you can argue with the fact that these new log tables make it easier.

They are absolutely insane, I recently went into a shop because I needed a set of them as an easy reference for some trig identities and a couple of other things that repeat in my Physics course and I stood there for about 20 minutes just gob smacked. They give enough information to pass the LC Maths, Physics and Chemistry exams at honors level. When I brought them into one of my classes to show others we spent the entire lecture in shock even our professor said he is not looking forward to future students coming through because he knows they will know an awful lot less because of them.

On the inflation of college degrees, I think it is fairly obvious that it has become increasingly easier to get 1.1's. In UL a lot of your degree is determined by your Final Year Project which is supposed to be an independently studied topic or theory, at the moment students are spoon fed the information they need and there are a few people I know that have basically had their supervisors do it for them.

Then there is I grades, which are grades awarded if you have missed an exam or an extended period of time due to illness or bereavement. In this case you sit the repeat exams but they are uncapped. They have become so easy to get it is ridiculous. One person in my course got a doctors cert for basically a flu and although I'd say she missed maybe 1 week because of this illness was able to break up her exams into two sets where she did 3 before Christmas and will do 3 during the repeats. There is no way that she deserved the I grades but still got them because she knew how to play the system. Come exam time for the second semester I will no doubt again come across friends who have missed time due to inebriation who will get the grade because they know all they have to do is talk to the Councillor and the welfare officer.

Laminations

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

People may also be aware that the Department of Education introduced new log tables this year. These log tables contain literally every formula on the course, from the root of quadratics to sum of series. I don't think you can argue with the fact that these new log tables make it easier.

I haven't seen these so sorry if I'm way off but on the one hand people complain that students are rote learning and on the other when they are given material and tested in their application of said materials people also complain. I don't think you can argue with the fact that these new log tables the internet makes life easier and there may be little need, unless you want to be a mathematician to learn off formulae. In the digital age people seldom have to remember a formula or poem when it can be googled. Times are changing.

Valmont

With all of this grade inflation business I hope that it will reveal the need for more private third level institutes who aren't overly influenced by the government.

Time Magazine

Valmont wrote: »

With all of this grade inflation business I hope that it will reveal the need for more private third level institutes who aren't overly influenced by the government.

To be fair, the market isn't so perfect as to differentiate the quality of these institutions either. I've heard a few people going to some private colleges and they claim you basically only have to pay your fees and show up to get a nice grade.

Mr.Micro

Intel and the like are clearly getting candidates who on paper look good but in the work place probably are not up to scratch. So the conclusion by Intel and the like is inflated credentials. IMO the Dept. of education is way out of touch with what is going on and what is required for the future. Here in Ireland Science teachers are expected to teach maths and science, but a maths teacher is not expected to teach science. No wonder there is such a fall off on the number of good grades gained in maths. Science and maths needs to be taught by experts not down graded as these are the subjects needed for technology, an area Ireland likes to think it has a foothold. Get your act together Batt and get some sort of credible standard into the education syytem before we lose all our international credibility.

Sleepy

Time Magazine wrote: »

To be fair, the market isn't so perfect as to differentiate the quality of these institutions either. I've heard a few people going to some private colleges and they claim you basically only have to pay your fees and show up to get a nice grade.

If the book What they teach you at Harvard Business School" is in any way accurate, you're essentially getting an MBA for learning the contents of a standard B Com...

AlekSmart

A number of my classmates simply can't handle concepts of common sense or analytical drinking etc required by a computing course and it shows. I honestly get the feeling that their extra 4 or 5 years education in secondary school have not prepared them one iota for the course.

Sorted !

rainbowtrout

entropic wrote: »

They are absolutely insane, I recently went into a shop because I needed a set of them as an easy reference for some trig identities and a couple of other things that repeat in my Physics course and I stood there for about 20 minutes just gob smacked. They give enough information to pass the LC Maths, Physics and Chemistry exams at honors level. When I brought them into one of my classes to show others we spent the entire lecture in shock even our professor said he is not looking forward to future students coming through because he knows they will know an awful lot less because of them.

On the inflation of college degrees, I think it is fairly obvious that it has become increasingly easier to get 1.1's. In UL a lot of your degree is determined by your Final Year Project which is supposed to be an independently studied topic or theory, at the moment students are spoon fed the information they need and there are a few people I know that have basically had their supervisors do it for them.

Then there is I grades, which are grades awarded if you have missed an exam or an extended period of time due to illness or bereavement. In this case you sit the repeat exams but they are uncapped. They have become so easy to get it is ridiculous. One person in my course got a doctors cert for basically a flu and although I'd say she missed maybe 1 week because of this illness was able to break up her exams into two sets where she did 3 before Christmas and will do 3 during the repeats. There is no way that she deserved the I grades but still got them because she knew how to play the system. Come exam time for the second semester I will no doubt again come across friends who have missed time due to inebriation who will get the grade because they know all they have to do is talk to the Councillor and the welfare officer.

Yep, totally agree, I just posted about this over on the Leaving Cert forum

Myself and my brother both went to UL. He graduated in 2005 with a pass degree (he didn't work very hard) in Environmental Science. His girlfriend did the same degree but was a year behind him. His average was pulled down in second year because he failed his chemistry exams. He was horrified to find the modules he failed (and subsequently repeated) were dropped from his girlfriends degree because they were now deemed unnecessary/too difficult/whatever spurious reason was given at the time. His thinking was that he got a pass degree but did more chemistry(which is necessary for the type of work he was hoping to be employed in), and plenty of people coming behind him got honours degrees because the difficult modules were removed from the course, but came out with less knowledge, but at first glance his qualification doesn't look as good.

I see it now with the course I did. I did 6 modules per term when I was there (graduated in 2000), the prospectus now shows the course outline where there is only 5 modules per term. So less work is being done for the same qualification.


Minimum Leaving Cert standard for entering a science program was an honour in Maths and a pass in Science or an honour in Science and a pass in maths. That's changed to an ordinary level C3 in science/maths. Now I know the reality is that students who are taking science at ordinary level are not as likely to go on to do a science degree/get the points for said degree. But seriously, how can they accept an ordinary level C3 as a minimum requirement, I have students in leaving cert who will get an ordinary C3 in biology/chemistry/ag science (my main subjects) who can barely spell the word science let alone complete a third level course in the area.

I correct leaving cert papers in the summer and if the breakdown of grades isn't falling the way the dept want it, the marking scheme is changed and we re-mark the papers. Effectively this reduces the failure rate and students pass exams that they don't really deserve to pass.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Byron85

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think you can get them on the CAO website.

eVeNtInE

This post has been deleted.

The Saint

This crowd have been flagging this issue regarding ITs and universities since 2007 and have widely been dismissed. Although now when Intel state it attention must be paid. :rolleyes:

http://www.stopgradeinflation.ie/index.html

gizmo555

The Saint wrote: »

This crowd have been flagging this issue regarding ITs and universities since 2007 and have widely been dismissed. Although now when Intel state it attention must be paid. :rolleyes:

http://www.stopgradeinflation.ie/index.html

Very interesting stuff. One of these guys, Dr Brendan Guilfoyle of Tralee IT was on Morning Ireland today (Tue Mar 2).

A key point from one of the papers on their website is that far too many people are going into 3rd level - this is a waste of these people's time and valuable educational resources which would be better used at 1st and 2nd level:

Wolf (2002) has explained how the UK has no economic use for a large proportion of the degree graduates generated each year by Universities there. Hesketh and Brown (2004) estimated that only one third of workers in the UK could be classified as having "knowledge based" jobs - the kind for which a degree might be necessary. They found that in the US, only a fifth of workers could be similarly categorised. In consequence, they argue that a great many university graduates are bound for disappointment. There will not be the number of high paying quality jobs they expect and their years in college will from an economic perspective be largely wasted. They estimate that only about 72,000 vacancies in the UK each year require a graduate, while there were over 300,000 graduates in 2005 with government plans to increase this number in the future. Employers in the UK seem to be in agreement with the view that there are too many graduates and that the expansion of higher education has adversely impacted on graduate quality (Association of Graduate Recruiters, 2004). Employers also believe that degrees have declined as a measure of ability in the previous ten years. A survey of employers carried out for a Channel 4 "30 Minutes" programme in May 2004 entitled "Dumbed Down Degrees" found that 70% of employers believed that degrees have declined as a measure of ability over the previous ten years (Channel 4 News, 2004).

http://www.stopgradeinflation.ie/The_Consequences_of_Grade_Inflation.pdf

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

anymore

gizmo555 wrote: »

Very interesting stuff. One of these guys, Dr Brendan Guilfoyle of Tralee IT was on Morning Ireland today (Tue Mar 2).

A key point from one of the papers on their website is that far too many people are going into 3rd level - this is a waste of these people's time and valuable educational resources which would be better used at 1st and 2nd level:

Wolf (2002) has explained how the UK has no economic use for a large proportion of the degree graduates generated each year by Universities there. Hesketh and Brown (2004) estimated that only one third of workers in the UK could be classified as having "knowledge based" jobs - the kind for which a degree might be necessary. They found that in the US, only a fifth of workers could be similarly categorised. In consequence, they argue that a great many university graduates are bound for disappointment. There will not be the number of high paying quality jobs they expect and their years in college will from an economic perspective be largely wasted. They estimate that only about 72,000 vacancies in the UK each year require a graduate, while there were over 300,000 graduates in 2005 with government plans to increase this number in the future. Employers in the UK seem to be in agreement with the view that there are too many graduates and that the expansion of higher education has adversely impacted on graduate quality (Association of Graduate Recruiters, 2004). Employers also believe that degrees have declined as a measure of ability in the previous ten years. A survey of employers carried out for a Channel 4 "30 Minutes" programme in May 2004 entitled "Dumbed Down Degrees" found that 70% of employers believed that degrees have declined as a measure of ability over the previous ten years (Channel 4 News, 2004).

http://www.stopgradeinflation.ie/The_Consequences_of_Grade_Inflation.pdf

These have comments have relevance for the arguement that PS salaries are higher than average private salaries becuse of the higher percentage of PS who have degrees.

murphaph

This isn't a uniquely Irish phenomenon. I do a German class once a week that helps me with my written German. As part of the class we have to read and analyse German newspaper articles, and write summaries of them etc.

Last week, the piece was about a dumbing down of the German Abitur over the past 20 years. Grades have improved year on year while employers have complained about a general lack of cop on among graduates. Sound familiar?

I think many countries are facing this debate. We can't all achieve firsts, so if the students are really working harder, then the exams need to be tougher to really single out the creme de la creme. I was always an average student and I make no bones about it. I got a first, barely, but I know there were smarter folks than me who deserved it more. There should be a way to differentiate these smarter folks, so they aren't lost in the ether and as a consequence, lost to our country!

Ireland is small and really needs to capitalise on any really smart people we have.

97i9y3941

seen a man from google talking about the interviews and stateing that many of the candidates dont have experience solving some problems they might throw at them,now its like in every industry,how the hell you suppose to gain experience if you cant even get a job in first place,its just going around in a circle again and again back onto the dole queue you go?..

gizmo555

anymore wrote: »

These have comments have relevance for the arguement that PS salaries are higher than average private salaries becuse of the higher percentage of PS who have degrees.

Well, of course we have seen "performance inflation" in the highest levels of the public service, where the bonuses which were supposed to reward excellent performance were awarded almost without exception to everyone who asked for one.

By retrospectively counting the bonus scheme as pay, the government has also contradicted its earlier position that the scheme was for rewarding high performance and was not a salary top-up. In effect, the scheme had been treated as a top-up since it began in 2002.

About 200 senior public servants participated in the scheme, which allowed them to apply for a bonus of up to 20 per cent of their salaries every year.

In practice, almost everyone who applied for a bonus received one; most were paid a bonus of around 10 per cent of salary, although in some years a small number were refused.

The bonus was not pensionable. In effect, virtually all of Ireland’s most senior public servants were adjudged to be exceeding the normal requirements of their jobs. Remarkably, they were all judged to be exceeding the requirements by a very similar degree - as the ‘‘performance related’’ bonuses nearly all came in around the same level, of 10 per cent of salary.

Leading by example, indeed!

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2010/01/10/story46666.asp

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

97i9y3941

i think its great that theres more people getting to third level,its a option not many of our parents have,i think problem lies in too many qualfied people around not enough work that suit them,"only the jobs that the min skill would be suitable for :mad:"*so much so not many people are doing the jobs but rather sit and draw welfare..

gizmo555

Fred83 wrote: »

i think its great that theres more people getting to third level,its a option not many of our parents have

I also think it's great that more people have the option of going to 3rd level. However, the point is that many of the people who are currently exercising that option will not benefit from it, which is wasting both their time and scarce educational resources.

(Great article, by the way, DF - one which should be mandatory reading for pushy south Dublin and Montenotte mothers!)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jmayo

I was part time working as a TA/lab assistant in a university in 1994 and even then some junior lecturers could tell you that they were being told to increase the grades and not fail so many people.
It was seen as a way of making sure our unemployment figures didn't increase.

I was one of those doing computer labs with certain second year computer related degree students who couldn't tell how an if ... then statement worked or how a for loop worked. :rolleyes:
These were second years who had supposedly passed a couple of computer programming courses and projects the preceeding year.
How these people made it through to second year was truly mind boggling.

The quality of some of the IT related graduates that arrived into the workforce during the dotcom bubble was poor to say the least.
Even worse a lot of them had no interest and couldn't give a toss becuase they had the luxury of not having to try hard to get or keep a job.
That was reason that some companies tried to source good staff in the likes of South Africa.

Look how many more people started going to thrid level college from the mid 90s onwards.
The only major break on this was the number of young men who decided to enter construction trades from 2002 onwards.
Did we suddenly become very intelligent or was it a case that there were loads of third level places on offer as there was a drive to get everyone a third level qualification of some sort ?

It appeared to be quantity over qaulity, so that the IDA or whoever could tell a prospective FDI that we were so well educated.

Amtmann

There's no doubt that many third level students have been dumbed down. More worrying, though, is that these students seem to revel in it. Articulateness in speech or prose is frequently derided and met with scorn by people who literally gape their ignorance at you. Post something with the words 'epitome' or 'recalcitrant' in the UCC forum for instance, and you'll be booed out of the place for not "speaking normally".

The amount of semi-literate gibberish I've encountered from third-level students is very surprising. The ability to use a semi-colon or a colon is now a rare thing; and, what's worse, many graduates with these deficiencies are now in the process of becoming primary and secondary school teachers.

Laminations

Furet wrote: »

There's no doubt that many third level students have been dumbed down. More worrying, though, is that these students seem to revel in it. Articulateness in speech or prose is frequently derided and met with scorn by people who literally gape their ignorance at you. Post something with the words 'epitome' or 'recalcitrant' in the UCC forum for instance, and you'll be booed out of the place for not "speaking normally".

The amount of semi-literate gibberish I've encountered from third-level students is very surprising. The ability to use a semi-colon or a colon is now a rare thing; and, what's worse, many graduates with these deficiencies are now in the process of becoming primary and secondary school teachers.

Stephen Fry would disagree with you using his 'evolution of language' argument.

http://boingboing.net/2009/01/07/stephen-fry-on-the-b.html

I'm not sure where I stand yet. Whatever about adherence to grammatical rules, I, like others feel that a verbose and wonderfully expressive english lexicon is being bastardised and diminished by younger generations but although I dont like it I agree with Fry and recognise this has always been the way language evolves with the times

Fry excoriates people who insist on "correctness" in language, and urges us all to speak in ways that entertain and please us, rather than adhering to some rigid, notional code (among other things, he has withering contempt for people who complain about the verbing of nouns, pointing out Shakespeare's proclivity for same, and the prevalence of verbed nouns such as "propositioning" in our everyday speech).

Kinski

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

To be fair, the old syllabus was badly in need of updating. When I sat my LC in 2000, the methods of textual analysis we encountered in the classroom were still largely derived from the New Criticism, a critical paradigm which had long-since passed its sell-by date. As such, reform was needed to make the LC course more relevant to the discipline of English at university level.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not defending the piece (that mark does seem far too high,) but I'd imagine the assessment criteria would concentrate on how well-written and internally-logical the compositions are - not how palatable the marker might find the views expressed therein. Polemic is a form of expression - as long as the student is conscious that that's what they're doing then I don't think it should be seen as a problem (bear in mind, Edmund Burke was once held up as an example of a great writer to second level students - his political views would hardly sit comfortably with many in contemporary Ireland.)

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The Modernists seem to have fallen from favour - I studied Joyce, Eliot and Yeats for LC, I don't think any of those are on the syllabus now. However, much of the work of those writers may well be too complex for a bunch of 16/17-year-olds to study, so I wouldn't necessarily see that as a bad thing - while the expansion of the course to encompass film and visual imagery is a positive step.

Having said all that, I have heard from a couple of people who mark English at third level that the compositional skills of many new students aren't up to the expected standards. It wouldn't surprise me if the course has gotten easier, but I don't think the issues you raise here are the problem. Much as I hate the expression 'back to basics', that may well be what's needed here - a more rigorous approach to the teaching and marking of basic written expression.

Amtmann

Laminations wrote: »

Stephen Fry would disagree with you using his 'evolution of language' argument.

http://boingboing.net/2009/01/07/stephen-fry-on-the-b.html

I'm not sure where I stand yet. Whatever about adherence to grammatical rules, I, like others feel that a verbose and wonderfully expressive english lexicon is being bastardised and diminished by younger generations but although I dont like it I agree with Fry and recognise this has always been the way language evolves with the times

I don't think he would disagree. Of course language evolves. The best example in English that I can think of is the loss of 'thou' as the informal second person personal pronoun. Few people appreciate just how profound a development this was, and how it has affected the culture of English-speaking people everywhere.

But to get back to my point: What I'm talking about isn't evolution; it is simply a lack of fluency and an inability to understand many words that, although not particularly common, shouldn't cause people to stare agog at you when you use them.

Change is fine and natural, so long as it means that understanding is maintained or improved. Sadly this isn't the case today among a lot of Irish young people.

Question: What's one of the words you could use to describe someone who has abandoned or renounced a conviction which they had previously strongly believed in?

Answer: An apostate.

Previously 'apostate' was used solely in a religious context. Enter Fry's evolution, where the word can now be applied creatively to describe a person who has abandoned any formerly strongly held belief or preference. In this case, evolution works to enrich a language and improve articulateness. The same process is at work when nouns are turned into verbs (such as 'to text').

I think in many cases we are seeing the opposite of that process in Ireland today, mainly because of a contemptuous attitude towards many words. In short, we are seeing a declining standard in vocabulary, not to mention grammar.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

gizmo555

My favourite piece on using language "properly" is Orwell's essay Politics and the English Language - as he wrote, "the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts".

almostnever

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This irritates me on a profound level. I'm currently repeating my Leaving Cert, and I got an A1 in English last year. I hope to get another one this year. But I think that it is an absolute disgrace that mechanics is worth a mere ten percent of any given answer. When you see people getting A1s for learning off some essay that they got at the Institute or at grinds and you know they can't differentiate between "your" and "you're", it is enough to make you lose faith. Correct grammar is not seen as an important aspect of the exam, the course, or the answer. It can be impossible to distinguish between the best students and those who don't have a clue but manage to get respectable grades on the back of a memorised essay.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Eliot and Yeats are both on the poetry course this year.

BillyBoyBad

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Over 2/3 of students at Trinity??? :eek: That's crazy