The General Discussion Thread

Pygmalion

Agnostic Mantis wrote: »

As to your student, what's the big problem if UL want to hand him some extra points for working a little harder for a subject which causes difficulty every year, rather than dropping down?

The problem I guess is that people are dropping down in a subject they're perfectly capable of doing (as shown by the fact he'll do it for extra points, meaning he knows he can).

I'm just providing that possible explanation because I'm pretty sure Conor's gone to bed and I want to see how this goes :P, tbh I did exactly that (dropped down in subjects I was capable of doing just because I didn't want to put in the work) so I can't really judge :P.

Jamie Starr

Pygmalion wrote: »

The problem I guess is that people are dropping down in a subject they're perfectly capable of doing (as shown by the fact he'll do it for extra points, meaning he knows he can).

I still don't see the problem. The student's being challenged for a start, which to all intents and purposes we assume is a good thing (sure don't we all love a nice good challenge!). Conor gets extra golds. UL get students who have got HL maths, and this is good for their appearance as a place from which businesses can siphon graduates. A bit more funding gets chucked into developing the mathematics faculty. Foreign businesses see us as having a good education system, they want to invest.

The only losers seem to be people who aren't good at Maths, or maybe think they aren't. Perhaps they'll considering working harder if there's a reward in it for them. As for people who are good in other subjects, it's a tough break- I understand that someone getting in your English course ahead of you because they did HL maths seems unfair, but life's occasionally a bit compettitive- the university scene and the job markets certainly are, and this hike in Maths points reflects what they're after. So you can either moan about it, or face up to it and do something about evening the score.

Ah, one o' clock- the rambling hour.

Pygmalion

Agnostic Mantis wrote: »

As for people who are good in other subjects, it's a tough break- I understand that someone getting in your English course ahead of you because they did HL maths seems unfair, but life's occasionally a bit compettitive- the university scene and the job markets certainly are, and this hike in Maths points reflects what they're after. So you can either moan about it, or face up to it and do something about evening the score.

Sounds very much like "Yes, it actually is quite unfair, I can see that, but don't bother complaining about it or discussing it" .

As for the hike in maths points reflecting what they're after it's a terribly implemented solution to the problem.
Elevating it above other subjects will only add to the reputation it has of being harder, will probably only convince those who are already fairly confident in their maths ability to take up Honours, and lead to people abusing the system and getting an unfair advantage even for courses in which it has little/no bearing (although IIRC it's currently only for technical courses?).
The real solution would be to present maths in a more interesting (interesting not meaning easier) way and try and show people that it's easier than they think.

Ah, one o' clock- the rambling hour.

*nods*

Agnostic Mantis

Agnostic Mantis wrote: »

As to your student, what's the big problem if UL want to hand him some extra points for working a little harder for a subject which causes difficulty every year, rather than dropping down?

The fact that so many students find it difficulty could be due to something like lack of interest or ability at primary school level. We shouldn't be rewarding those who can do it more, we should be trying to get to the root of the reason so many people aren't up to scratch anyway.

Although one thing I have to say for it, is that maybe it will make more people in the country realise that maths and science are what's most important for the future, because there seems to be a kind of resentful attitude from students towards those types of subject.

Jamie Starr

I'm only defending the extra points position because the education system has been pursuing a path of epic failure in subjects like Maths and Irish for many years. It seems they've begun to recognise that, with this Project Maths dealy, and the emphasis on spoken Irish- but until they make a genuine difference to the way these subjects are taught, I think students should receive bonuses for coping with lousy educational practices.

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia we will all be able to live in one complex function where y= 2 and x= 2k.

Richard Cranium

Agnostic Mantis wrote: »

I'm only defending the extra points position because the education system has been pursuing a path of epic failure in subjects like Maths and Irish for many years. It seems they've begun to recognise that, with this Project Maths dealy, and the emphasis on spoken Irish- but until they make a genuine difference to the way these subjects are taught, I think students should receive bonuses for coping with lousy educational practices.

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia we will all be able to live in one complex function where y= 2 and x= 2k.

I was going to steer very clear of this discussion, as I've been there and done that several times before, but I'd just like to point out one thing to everyone (silly-season journalists and people who write letters to newspapers in particular):

Ireland’s second-level students perform at the OECD average for maths

This is not disastrous. All the coverage of the topic over the summer seemed to imply that we are one of the most innumerate countries in the developed world, whereas actually we are just keeping pace. No more, no less. Of course it's not the best platform from which to launch a "smart-economy," but it's by no means the worst either. It's, well, average...

Source here

Interestingly, several reports (I couldn't be bothered linking as I'm still trying not to be drawn too deeply into this discussion) point out that we have very low levels of investment in education. Truly very low, that is, not very low like our middling performance in maths. Perhaps doing something about large class sizes and underfunded universities might negate the need to change the syllabus again.

KnifeWRENCH

Namlub wrote: »

Essentially bribing more people to do HL maths in order to bump up percentages isn't really getting to the the root of the problem (SEE WHAT I DID THAR)

Why has no-one else quoted this? I lol'd anyway!

I'm not so sure I agree with bonus points for HL maths; it's only re-enforcing the whole "HL Maths is WAY harder than every other subject" attitude. And while it may be the toughest subject for a lot of people (it was for me, even though I went on to study it in college. Go figure!) it's not something that can be said of everyone. Tbh I reckon I would have done a lot better in HL maths if I hadn't been so intimidated by it; the reputation it has as being difficult sank into my head and right up until my pres I was thinking myself unable for it, despite having never failed an exam. I dunno, maybe that was my own fault for buying into the "Maths is too hard" attitude but I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one who felt that way.

IF HL Maths bonus points ARE introduced, I think it should only be done for certain courses like Maths, Physics, Engineeing and Computer Science. But then you've the problem of Arts; some people do maths through Arts and it's not fair to not offer them bonus points when people doing maths-related science courses are getting them. On the other hand, it's impossible to do this without offering the bonus points to every other student applying for Arts, even if they go on to do English/Politics/non-maths related subject.

So overall, I think it's too tricky to implement fairly. The problem of enticing more people to do HL Maths shouldn't be solved by offering unfair advantages like these bonus points. Nor should it be solved by dumbing maths down, á la Project Maths.

Bascially, the only way to ensure more people do HL Maths is to take a look at how Maths is taught at primary school and Junior Cert cycle, and see if the problem lies somewhere along there. 5th years won't take HL maths unless they've had a good maths education up to that point.

tl;dr version - No to bonus points, basically. And no to project maths.

sock puppet

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

IF HL Maths bonus points ARE introduced, I think it should only be done for certain courses like Maths, Physics, Engineeing and Computer Science. But then you've the problem of Arts; some people do maths through Arts and it's not fair to not offer them bonus points when people doing maths-related science courses are getting them. On the other hand, it's impossible to do this without offering the bonus points to every other student applying for Arts, even if they go on to do English/Politics/non-maths related subject.

While points for Maths and Physics courses seem a bit higher it'd be almost pointless to offer bonus points in Engineering and CS. Points for CS courses are mainly in the low-mid 300s. Engineering is up around 400 in some places but much lower in some colleges. Practically no one who does well in maths is going to struggle to achieve those points. Even Maths and Physics don't require a huge number of points.

Grindylow

Recession lads.. 'tis an awful thing.

Namlub

I have no idea what project maths is. And I'm doing it...

unknown13

About the Extra points for maths thing. Alot of C&H posters know my maths situation and tbh, I am not really in the mood to have a big long argument over the extra points but I am making one point only.

The extra maths points allows a minority who are really good at maths and who barely struggle at Higher Level Maths a way of getting extra points for no other reason other than they are very good at Maths and they understand what is going on and they don't need to put long hours in studying the subject. The extra maths points does act as an incentitive to people who are barely passing HL maths but gives a minority free extra points for no reason what so ever.

Novella

I probably would have said it was horrible and mean and awful a few years ago... 'cause I kinda suck at Maths. I had terrible teachers, just never got it. However, my baby bro is in sixth year now and having seen the amount of work that kid puts in, not just to Maths mind you, but to everything, he deserves every single point he gets.

People often fob off the greatest victories with things like, "Oh, well that person is naturally gifted". Yeah, maybe they are, or maybe they put in a huge amount of work behind the scenes. Either or, sitting a Higher Level Maths paper is no easy feat so yeah, extra points, go for it!

On a side note, I think extra points for HL Irish would be good too, considering how the levels of people sitting Higher are steadily decreasing.

unknown13

unknown13 wrote: »

The extra maths points does act as an incentitive to people who are barely passing HL maths but gives a minority free extra points for no reason what so ever.

This is a very good point. The fact is that by offering bonus points to maths students, you're not actually making anybody any better at maths.

Novella wrote:

Having seen the amount of work that kid puts in, not just to Maths mind you, but to everything, he deserves every single point he gets;
Sitting a Higher Level Maths paper is no easy feat

Of course he deserves every single point he gets, and not a single one less or more.
And the main point is that while many people in Ireland seem to consider maths difficult, there are people who find it easy, and who find things like English or History difficult (myself, for example, in the case of History).

Students who find History difficult shouldn't get bonus points for doing it.

Novella

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a very good point. The fact is that by offering bonus points to maths students, you're not actually making anybody any better at maths.


Of course he deserves every single point he gets, and not a single one less or more.
And the main point is that while many people in Ireland seem to consider maths difficult, there are people who find it easy, and who find things like English or History difficult (myself, for example, in the case of History).

Students who find History difficult shouldn't get bonus points for doing it.

I don't think this incentive is to do with what people consider easy. It's really to encourage more people to sit the HL paper as far as I'm aware... and in my eyes, that's a good thing. Perhaps there should be extra points for taking HL papers in all subjects with a significant decline in people studying higher.

Novella

Novella wrote: »

I don't think this incentive is to do with what people consider easy. It's really to encourage more people to sit the HL paper as far as I'm aware... and in my eyes, that's a good thing. Perhaps there should be extra points for taking HL papers in all subjects with a significant decline in people studying higher.

But the main point we've been making is that since LC results are used to determine college places, this is unfair on people whose talents lie in other subjects.

And I don't see the problem with the decline in Higher Maths. Higher Maths is only useful if it leads to College Graduates in Science and Maths areas. We need better maths education in general, not a hasty, unfair incentive.

Noel2k9 wrote:

Recession lads.. 'tis an awful thing.

Are many people here really feeling the recession? I feel a bit sheltered from it by my parents. They're feeling it a bit badly, but coping in such a way that makes me as much of a broke student as I'd be outside of a recession.

Novella

Actually... I don't know if I'm making sense!

Davidius

I'm not sure if there's particularly high failure rates at ordinary level but I imagine if there was they'd be trying to stop HL capable students pushing up the standard. That might be a reason for them to give HL an incentive albeit very poor considering they could just rework the grading scheme if they really want 'good-on-paper' results while making grades look properly distributed.

I don't think there's really much of a problem with the course itself, if anything it's a little too easy to get away with not understanding it. I know my opinion holds little weight because I never had any real difficulty with the HL course but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect students to have an understanding of those topics if they're studying the higher level maths course.

I won't comment on how the course is taught because to be fair the three maths teachers I had in secondary school were competent. I've never heard a bad word against my LC maths teacher as he genuinely was quite a good and dedicated teacher.

However a lot of people in my year did have an attitude problem, so much so that maybe half of those who had automatically been assigned to the HL class decided it was going to be too hard on day 1 and dropped. A lot of the people took as many opportunities to skip it when they could, using the time for extra-curricular activities. Some times they would pull the "it looked too hard" excuse to not do homework. Of course this all just anecdotes but I imagine it's at least a partial reflection as to how a lot of students approach maths.

There really aren't many pros to increasing the points for honours maths. The most I could see coming from it is that maybe a handful of students will realise it's not as ridiculously hard as it's made out to be. It's more likely that it'll reinforce the notion that it's overwhelmingly difficult however. Receiving higher points for a maths-centric courses seem quite pointless as all it will do is artificially inflate the points seeing as everybody who applies is likely to have HL maths to start with. If it really does matter that students have HL maths for the course then it ought to be a requirement anyway.

Increased points across the board for HL maths is just foolishness. I certainly wouldn't like to be denied entry to a course because I didn't do HL Irish despite not needing it at all.

I drew a Venn diagram anyway to illustrate one of the points people have made.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/10284281/001.jpg
Edit: Picture's too big, you can follow the link if you still want to see it.

DingosAteMyBaby

sock puppet wrote: »

While I've no experience of arts courses I do share a few classes with BESS in Trinity. The two courses we shared with them last year were our easiest courses and the maths they do was of a level far below what we're used to. There's no way anyone could argue that a business degree is as hard as a science/maths/computers/engineering degree. Of course this is just one particular course that happens to be relatively easy and it was only first year so it'd be wrong to assume the same for all courses.

Also the failure rate in science courses as opposed to arts courses is an objective (though you could argue inaccurate) way of measuring difficulty.

I could pretty much argue that actually. Firstly, seeing as you only sat in on two modules in first year you can't just make a snap judgement about a business degrees in general. From my own experiences with my degree, the aim of first year was to give us a basic foundation of knowledge across a wide variety of business related subjects. This means that some people good at maths may have found my introductory business maths module easy, I personally found it difficult as I have always struggled with maths. But for every module that someone found easy, there were 3 more difficult ones to take its place.

This idea that business degrees are easier than science/maths based degrees is most definitely a naive one. I have plenty of friends doing science based degrees who have said that they would struggle with my workload and modules. I was always quite good at science and I did Biology and Chemistry for the Leaving Cert. I sat in on a few Biology/Chemistry lectures with my friends last year and I found them quite easy to understand, however I would never say that all science degrees are easier than other degrees.

Different subject areas require different skill-sets. Not only do we have to be intellectual and learn a great deal about a wide range of diverse subjects including Law, Economics, Accounting, Management etc, but we also have to be quite outgoing and gregarious. We have to be able to work with people, deal with them effectively and understand their motives and needs. This requires an in-depth knowledge of management styles and methods. We have to be comfortable speaking in front of large amounts of people, making presentations and writing speeches. This may sound basic and but We have to be creative and innovative on a daily basis, always trying to think outside the box and envisage new, fresh ideas.

Judging a degree or even a subject on it's perceived difficulty is just ridiculous IMO. Different types of people are skilled in different areas. I'm sure many Maths students would find an Arts degree quite difficult and vice versa. Just think back to the Leaving Cert. If you took 10 students and asked them what the hardest Leaving Cert subject is, you would get a whole myriad of different answers.

I'm just sick of dealing with the ignorant attitude of some people toward different types of degrees. Arts students usually get the brunt of it but us business-folk sometimes get dragged in as well.


/rant over:P

KnifeWRENCH

sock puppet wrote: »

While points for Maths and Physics courses seem a bit higher it'd be almost pointless to offer bonus points in Engineering and CS. Points for CS courses are mainly in the low-mid 300s. Engineering is up around 400 in some places but much lower in some colleges. Practically no one who does well in maths is going to struggle to achieve those points. Even Maths and Physics don't require a huge number of points.

Mmmm I suppose. The low points is to do with low demand, rather than level of difficulty though.
Still, it would be nice to get those bonus points anyway. Let's say it's 50 bonus points for an A1 (figure plucked from thin air); someone going for engineering or CS with 600 points can then say they got 650 if they get the A1. Nice little confidence boost, if nothing else.

estadio

People going for science degrees like engineering don't require the extra points however Maths HL is a lot of work and i believe extra points will reward that extra effort required to achieve a high grade.

Davidius

estadio wrote: »

People going for science degrees like engineering don't require the extra points however Maths HL is a lot of work and i believe extra points will reward that extra effort required to achieve a high grade.

That's just the thing though, HL maths isn't a lot of work for some students. Of all the subjects I did I found it the easiest whereas I was quite useless at Irish.
The only people who would really benefit from extra points in HL maths are those looking for a course that doesn't have a lot of applicants with HL maths. That would suggest the college doesn't see it as a necessity so it seems quite unfair that a student would get preference because they studied something irrelevant to the course at a higher level.

QueenOfLeon

I don't really agree with the bonus points, although I'd be all up for it this time 2 years ago! (Dear God I'm so old...:()

Sure it might get more people to do it, but I think people will start putting more and more time into maths and neglect the rest of the subjects, I found myself doing that anyway without the extra incentive.

sock puppet

DingosAteMyBaby wrote: »

I could pretty much argue that actually. Firstly, seeing as you only sat in on two modules in first year you can't just make a snap judgement about a business degrees in general. From my own experiences with my degree, the aim of first year was to give us a basic foundation of knowledge across a wide variety of business related subjects. This means that some people good at maths may have found my introductory business maths module easy, I personally found it difficult as I have always struggled with maths. But for every module that someone found easy, there were 3 more difficult ones to take its place.

This idea that business degrees are easier than science/maths based degrees is most definitely a naive one. I have plenty of friends doing science based degrees who have said that they would struggle with my workload and modules. I was always quite good at science and I did Biology and Chemistry for the Leaving Cert. I sat in on a few Biology/Chemistry lectures with my friends last year and I found them quite easy to understand, however I would never say that all science degrees are easier than other degrees.

Different subject areas require different skill-sets. Not only do we have to be intellectual and learn a great deal about a wide range of diverse subjects including Law, Economics, Accounting, Management etc, but we also have to be quite outgoing and gregarious. We have to be able to work with people, deal with them effectively and understand their motives and needs. This requires an in-depth knowledge of management styles and methods. We have to be comfortable speaking in front of large amounts of people, making presentations and writing speeches. This may sound basic and but We have to be creative and innovative on a daily basis, always trying to think outside the box and envisage new, fresh ideas.

Judging a degree or even a subject on it's perceived difficulty is just ridiculous IMO. Different types of people are skilled in different areas. I'm sure many Maths students would find an Arts degree quite difficult and vice versa. Just think back to the Leaving Cert. If you took 10 students and asked them what the hardest Leaving Cert subject is, you would get a whole myriad of different answers.

I'm just sick of dealing with the ignorant attitude of some people toward different types of degrees. Arts students usually get the brunt of it but us business-folk sometimes get dragged in as well.


/rant over:P

I didn't judge the worth of the degree on it's difficulty. Nor do I think that the subjects studied in BESS are easier than in other degrees, but the level that some of them are studied at in first and second year is low enough. And I did say that i only have experience of 1st and 2nd year. I know that they have to have a good knowledge in their chosen subjects for their actual degree. It's also two modules out of 6 which added on to maths makes up half of their year.

I don't think difficulty affects the worth of a degree but it'd be naive to assume that the work required in every course is equal. Someone who we'd have all considered to be probably the most intelligent and hard-working in our course transferred into Mathematics and said it was much harder than what we'd been doing.