Education Reform

oppenheimer1

Looking at the PISA statistics is depressing reading. We've invested heavily in education over the past decade and what we've found is that this has led to a lowering of standards. I propose a new approach, one which will help justify the large salaries being received by teachers. This is likely to be incredibly unpopular with both Teachers and pupils but in the long term could benefit the country.

Cut support staff and increase class numbers.

Increase the length of the teaching year.

Provide Summer schools with 1 to 1 tuition for those that need extra help

The very long holidays were once introduced in order to let children that were from a rural background help out with the harvest and making the hay. This is out of date in modern Ireland. The long holidays at the moment only serve to increase childcare costs for parents and lead to lower educational attainment by children. As it stands Irish teachers work 167 at post primary level and 183 at primary level, far fewer than their lower paid UK equivalent who work a longer year.

Could such a major reform be undertaken under the Croke Park agreement? Would any minister be couragous enough to take on the teaching unions?

muireann50

I agree that we need huge reforms in education. Increasing the length of the school year makes sense but in my opinion increasing class size couldn't possibly be a solution. If you look at a primary school classroom, a lot have one teacher and 30 students at the moment. I can't imagine managing 30+ 6 year olds in one small classroom is the easiest job in the world! This surely makes it difficult for the teacher to address the different problems individual students are facing when it comes to reading and maths difficulties. If children don't get a good start in primary school its difficult for them to excel at 2nd level

amacca

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Looking at the PISA statistics is depressing reading. We've invested heavily in education over the past decade and what we've found is that this has led to a lowering of standards. I propose a new approach, one which will help justify the large salaries being received by teachers. This is likely to be incredibly unpopular with both Teachers and pupils but in the long term could benefit the country.

• Cut support staff and increase class numbers.

• Increase the length of the teaching year.

• Provide Summer schools with 1 to 1 tuition for those that need extra help

The very long holidays were once introduced in order to let children that were from a rural background help out with the harvest and making the hay. This is out of date in modern Ireland. The long holidays at the moment only serve to increase childcare costs for parents and lead to lower educational attainment by children. As it stands Irish teachers work 167 at post primary level and 183 at primary level, far fewer than their lower paid UK equivalent who work a longer year.

Could such a major reform be undertaken under the Croke Park agreement? Would any minister be couragous enough to take on the teaching unions?

think you missed out on one important thing.

speaking as a former teacher you forgot to mention any sort of support for teachers when it comes to rampant persistent bad behaviour from students.

small minority (sometimes not so small) don't want to learn, don't want to allow others to learn, wont be told what to do and persist in disruptive behavior because consequences for their actions are non existent or laughably small.



if you want to implement the above or talk about implementing above then you should be willing to talk about providing a tolerable work environment for teachers where they can actually teach rather than be expected to engage in crowd control or entertainment to keep the little dahlings quiet.


tackle a culture of laziness, unwillingness to try, outright bad behavior etc and I bet those PISA statistics would improve. tackle a culture of the child having every right under the sun but no responsibilities etc, tackle a culture of parents using schools as daycare facilities etc etc

+ if you're going to cut support staff etc then presumably you admit that this thing of a totally inclusive society is utterly ridiculous and that certain students are simply wholly unsuitable for the mainstream classroom and need alternative arrangements.

byhookorbycrook

As it stands Irish teachers work 167 at post primary level and 183 at primary level, far fewer than their lower paid UK equivalent who work a longer year.

And they scored worse than our schools....

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

#15

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

As it stands Irish teachers work 167 at post primary level and 183 at primary level, far fewer than their lower paid UK equivalent who work a longer year.

That's not true.

Irish primary teachers have more teaching time than almost every other country in the OECD.

I agree that reform is needed, but we must be clear about the areas that actually need reform.

The first thing I would suggest is to stop looking at the UK system - there are superior systems in other countries.

The second thing is to recognise all the factors at play

- intended learning outcomes
- has standardisation been a good thing? Should we continue with it?
- quality of teachers
- P/T ratio
- changing cultural and societal values and the impact upon the education system
- education policy by successive govts
- assessment of teachers (what form should it take? who assesses them?)
- teacher recommendations for improving the education system
- economics of education: how much to invest, and how to distribute that investment

I'm sure there are more factors that I'm not thinking of.

True educational reform is necessary and desirable, but it must be done thoroughly and correctly.

I posted this on another thread but I think it's better suited to this thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

byhookorbycrook

The primary curriculum was totally revised and now there is talk of removing some of the areas introduced as "stand alone" subjects such as drama.

jimmycrackcorm

Having a child in Gaelscoil, I'm impressed by standard the education delivery that I witness. But one thing stands out is that the class have a teaching assistant - I don't know why but it appears to be some sort of support mechanism.

Seeing as teachers are actually concerned about the delivery of quality education I'd suggest that this model can be applied if we paid teachers less and hired more assistants....

oppenheimer1

#15 wrote: »

That's not true.

Irish primary teachers have more teaching time than almost every other country in the OECD.

Teachers in the UK get 13 weeks holidays, and don't get their summer holidays until towards the end of July. Here primary teachers get their holidays at the end of June and secondary teachers at the end of May!

I agree that reform is needed, but we must be clear about the areas that actually need reform.

The first thing I would suggest is to stop looking at the UK system - there are superior systems in other countries.

The second thing is to recognise all the factors at play

- intended learning outcomes
- has standardisation been a good thing? Should we continue with it?
- quality of teachers
- P/T ratio
- changing cultural and societal values and the impact upon the education system
- education policy by successive govts
- assessment of teachers (what form should it take? who assesses them?)
- teacher recommendations for improving the education system
- economics of education: how much to invest, and how to distribute that investment

I'm sure there are more factors that I'm not thinking of.

True educational reform is necessary and desirable, but it must be done thoroughly and correctly.

I posted this on another thread but I think it's better suited to this thread

I agree that the above are important, particularly the assessment of teachers and the ability to remove ones that are failing at their job. Low pupil teacher ratios are of course a good thing, but they are expensive with current rates of teachers pay. Either teachers must accept lower pay and increased numbers of teachers or the same pay with bigger classes. Granted that they are likely to go for the latter option more flexibility must be demanded of them. Most other workers are only get the minimum 4 weeks leave as outlined by law, why should teachers get between 14 to 18 weeks (approx)? If we can't afford more teachers, then we should look to give students more contact hours by demanding flexibility.

Summer schools for those that are struggling would be perfect. Imagine what say a month of tuition with one teacher and say five weak students could accomplish.

Increasing the length of the school year and including provision of summer school would be a cheap and effective way of improving education standards.

Amazotheamazing

Is there actually an educational reason for the long holidays?

oppenheimer1

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Is there actually an educational reason for the long holidays?

Nope, the reason for the long holidays is that back in the day children were needed to help out on farms and save turf. The holidays have been protected by the teaching unions as a perk since this reason became no longer valid. The long holidays certainly don't improve learning outcomes.

Amazotheamazing

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Nope, the reason for the long holidays is that back in the day children were needed to help out on farms and save turf. The holidays have been protected by the teaching unions as a perk since this reason became no longer valid. The long holidays certainly don't improve learning outcomes.

What are the holidays like in other first world countries?

byhookorbycrook

http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/that-oecd-some-interesting-data-on-education/

"According to the report, teachers in Ireland teach 735 hours per annum compared with European average of 661 hours. In addition, the ratio of students to teaching staff in Irish second level schools is higher than the average among other European member countries "

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/fulltext/9610061ec032.pdf?expires=1291841441&id=0000&accname=guest&checksum=2B0320B9F4ACD229FCCF83F04C0615A3

Oh..and another OECD quote:
"Teachers are still paid less than other people with similar educational qualifications in most countries"

#15

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Teachers in the UK get 13 weeks holidays, and don't get their summer holidays until towards the end of July. Here primary teachers get their holidays at the end of June and secondary teachers at the end of May!

And still primary teachers do more hours than most of their counterparts.

Either teachers must accept lower pay and increased numbers of teachers or the same pay with bigger classes.

They are not the only choices.

Summer schools for those that are struggling would be perfect. Imagine what say a month of tuition with one teacher and say five weak students could accomplish.

It's also a great way to stigmatise a group of children - I'm not familiar with research on this area.

I would imagine discreet one-to-one tutoring would be better for the child.

Increasing the length of the school year and including provision of summer school would be a cheap and effective way of improving education standards.

Not necessarily.

If the quality of teaching is not good enough in the first place, then more of the same benefits no one.

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Is there actually an educational reason for the long holidays?

Well, in the case of small children, there are definite developmental reasons why they should not spend an undue amount of time in a formal learning environment.

#15

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

What are the holidays like in other first world countries?

Similar to here.

Most countries have shorter blocks of holiday-time, but end up doing less teaching hours than Ireland.

mikemac

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Is there actually an educational reason for the long holidays?

That goes way, way back when everyone was needed for the farm or the bog.
If you lose your crop or the hay you'll end up in poverty or under severe pressure. The children were needed to work

Amazotheamazing

#15 wrote: »

Similar to here.

Most countries have shorter blocks of holiday-time, but end up doing less teaching hours than Ireland.

How does that work?

The students in other countries seem to have longer days and shorter holidays (possibly marginal in both cases) so how are they getting less teaching hours?

Amazotheamazing

feelingstressed wrote: »

That goes way, way back when everyone was needed for the farm or the bog.
If you lose your crop or the hay you'll end up in poverty or under severe pressure. The children were needed to work

True in Ireland, but hardly true in large cities in Japan, France, America, England or Germany, are their holidays significantly different?

byhookorbycrook

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

How does that work?

The students in other countries seem to have longer days and shorter holidays (possibly marginal in both cases) so how are they getting less teaching hours?

In some countries they close say, on a Weds or take half-days for sports (as opposed to PE.)There are all kinds of things like "SATS" days or study days where the children are physically in school, but not being taught.

#15

feelingstressed wrote: »

That goes way, way back when everyone was needed for the farm or the bog.
If you lose your crop or the hay you'll end up in poverty or under severe pressure. The children were needed to work

There may be some truth in that, but it's exaggerated. Kids in New York, London, Dublin, Berlin etc were not needed out on the bogs.

byhookorbycrook

This is an example I just found for an American "Junior High"

Office Hours 8:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Upcoming Events
Nov. 24-26Thanksgiving Break
Nov. 30 - Dec. 2Book Fair
Dec. 1Choir Concerts @ 6:00, 6:45 & 7:
30Dec. 2Parent Teacher Conference @ 4-7:30
Dec. 7 Beginning Band Concert @ 6:30
Dec. 8 Chess Tournament @ 2:45
Dec 9 Band Concert @ 6:30
Dec. 14Intermediate Choir to Mall 10-2
Dec. 15 AF Singers to Joseph Smith Mem. 1-6
Dec. 16Orchestra Concert @ AFHS
6:00 & 7:30
Dec. 16-17 Charity Basketball Games
Dec. 20-31Christmas Break

Amazotheamazing

#15 wrote: »

There may be some truth in that, but it's exaggerated. Kids in New York, London, Dublin, Berlin etc were not needed out on the bogs.

So why are they so long?

I honestly don't see any reason for it, especially wrt to older kids.

I can see why teachers and students want holidays, I just don't see the benefit of them.

#15

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

How does that work?

The students in other countries seem to have longer days and shorter holidays (possibly marginal in both cases) so how are they getting less teaching hours?

Just to clarify, I'm talking about primary.

I have no idea about secondary.

Off the top of my head-
Countries like the UK often provide breakfast and other meals for the kids so maybe that is why the kids have longer days but less instruction time.

#15

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I can see why teachers and students want holidays, I just don't see the benefit of them.

I'm not sure about teenagers, but children do benefit from being free from structured learning environments.

The extent of the benefit is unclear but there is a benefit (some educationalists have suggested that school holds children back, although that's the most extreme end of the argument).

byhookorbycrook

http://schools.polk-fl.net/lenavista/calendar.htm

An elementary school calendar:
Kids go back on the 23rd of August, and get holidays for Christmas 18th of Dec, to be back on Jan 4th,finish for summer holidays on the 9th of June.

What we need in Ireland is to have "storm days" built into the calendar and taken as needed, such as in the above example.

That said, nobody could have imagined this cold snap so early in the year.

oppenheimer1

#15 wrote: »

It's also a great way to stigmatise a group of children - I'm not familiar with research on this area.

It would hardly stigmatise them, certainly no more than having to stay back a year. The thought of having reduced summer holidays compared to their peers might even offer an incentive for pupils to improve.

As it stands, teachers, particularly those in post-primary have an excessive amount of holidays. The contrast is especially stark when compared with the rest of the economy. Given that our education system is showing signs of failure compared to its OECD peers, extension of contact hours I feel would improve standards.

Given that there must be cut backs, summer schools and longer hours could provide a way of maintaining or improving standards. This should be combined with the ability to dismiss teachers that cannot teach.

Removing these two barriers wrt holidays and dismissals could revolutionise education in Ireland.

byhookorbycrook

Teachers are subject to more scrutiny than ever before. An underperforming teacher can be dismissed.

Staying back a year is generally not an option in primary, unless there is a significant educational difficulty.

#15

That's not even close to being a revolution.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It would hardly stigmatise them,

It certainly would. Small children especially.

certainly no more than having to stay back a year.

Kids don't stay back anymore. It is discouraged throughout the education system.
LC Cycle is different, for obvious reasons.

The thought of having reduced summer holidays compared to their peers might even offer an incentive for pupils to improve.

Only if the determining factor was contact time.

And as we have not determined that, you cannot claim that it would improve outcomes.

What if the problems are teacher quality? Or a poor curriculum? Or inappropriate methodologies? Or learning difficulties?

Reducing summer holidays is an ineffective and redundant response to any of those.

As it stands, teachers, particularly those in post-primary have an excessive amount of holidays.

It's broadly in line with the OECD.
In terms of teaching time, primary teachers are near the top of the tree, and secondary teachers are about average.

Given that our education system is showing signs of failure compared to its OECD peers, extension of contact hours I feel would improve standards.

It's showing signs of being around the middle of the pack.

Extension of contact hours is only necessary if you can show that
1) teachers are teaching less than their international counterparts
2) if educational outcomes are being affected due to low levels of teaching time

And you have not shown either of those to be the case.

This should be combined with the ability to dismiss teachers that cannot teach.

Teacher evaluation is another area worth exploring, but it's not quite so simple as 'he can't teach, fire him'.
Supports need to be in place to improve performance - if that doesn't work, then steps should be taken to remove a teacher.

Removing these two barriers wrt holidays and dismissals could revolutionise education in Ireland.

Did you look at the video I posted on the previous page? What you have suggested is not revolutionary IMO.

oppenheimer1

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Teachers are subject to more scrutiny than ever before. An underperforming teacher can be dismissed.

Staying back a year is generally not an option in primary, unless there is a significant educational difficulty.

When was the last time an under performing teacher was dismissed? I'm sure it technically can be done but in reality its almost impossible. The two things teachers guard most ferociously are their holidays and their job security.

Unless things have changed recently, staying back was very much used for pupils underperforming particularly in Primary, granted it was more difficult in secondary.

No one has given a convincing reason for keeping the status quo. Considering we're in such a bind financially and one group of state employees have, quite frankly, outrageous holiday entitlements there is considerable scope for improving the productivity of teachers. Long holidays benefit only the teachers. It doesn't benefit parents as it increases their childcare costs and it doesn't benefit the children.

We have education infrastructure and it sits idle for almost half the year... While at the same time we are being told our children are failing.

#15

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Unless things have changed recently, staying back was very much used for pupils underperforming particularly in Primary

They have changed.

No one has given a convincing reason for keeping the status quo.

No one has given a convincing reason for changing it.

Considering we're in such a bind financially and one group of state employees have, quite frankly, outrageous holiday entitlements there is considerable scope for improving the productivity of teachers.

So it's to save money? And not for educational reform?

Long holidays benefit only the teachers. It doesn't benefit parents as it increases their childcare costs and it doesn't benefit the children.

It does benefit the children, you've been told that already. Many educational philosphers and child development experts agree on the need for time away from schools.
New research is even showing that homework may not be of any benefit to children.

oppenheimer1

#15 wrote: »

Only if the determining factor was contact time.

And as we have not determined that, you cannot claim that it would improve outcomes.

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no evidence of increasing contact time has a positive influence on learning outcomes? Perhaps you'd care to explain the existence of a thriving grinds industry in this country.

Increasing contact time does work, as does one-on-one tuition (as I suggest should be provided by summer schools).

oppenheimer1

#15 wrote: »

So it's to save money? And not for educational reform?

Our financial quandary gives us the impetus for reform. It should have been done a long time ago. The fact that the incompetent teachers that taught me are still "teaching" is wrong.

Of course I would prefer if class sizes could be shrunk but we don't have the money to do that. The alternative I propose is to increase contact time to offset the cuts that will worsen the education outcomes of our children.

The cuts are going to happen, increasing contact could offset the damage. Teachers should not get such long holiday entitlements while our children are failing. Its rewarding mediocrity at best and incompetence at worst.

#15 wrote: »

Teacher evaluation is another area worth exploring, but it's not quite so simple as 'he can't teach, fire him'.

Why not? If I repeatedly screw up at my job, I'll be shown the door. Of course there should be considerations for the working environment, say in a socially deprived area where parents don't value education. If a teacher is consistently failing through laziness or incompetence and showing an unwillingness or inability to improve then they should go. It works in the private sector so why not in the public.

#15

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no evidence of increasing contact time has a positive influence on learning outcomes? Perhaps you'd care to explain the existence of a thriving grinds industry in this country.

Grinds facilitate rote learning. Which in turn, tends to result in high points. Your idea is based on the notion that high points = a desirable educational outcome.
Grinds are not resulting in better outcomes - they are just a means of working the system.
A system that we should be destroying.

Increasing contact time does work,

Why then do the countries at the top of the PISA standings not have the highest levels of contact time?

By your logic, the USA would be top of the charts by some distance.

High performers like Finland and S Korea have lower levels of contact hours than Ireland and the USA.
It's obvious that contact time is just one of multiple factors in determining outcomes.

Teachers should not get such long holiday entitlements while our children are failing.

Why are you fixated on holidays, when your thread title suggested you were interested in thorough reform?

Holidays are of course part of the discussion, but at least present some evidence that increasing contact time will result in better outcomes.

I am in favour of increased contact time to improve educational outcomes.
I am not in favour of it to satisfy ''other'' desires.

If a teacher is consistently failing through laziness or incompetence and showing an unwillingness or inability to improve then they should go.

That's what I'm saying. At least give them a warning that they need to improve and to invest in personal professional development.
After such measures have failed, then let them go.

We are approaching this from completely different angles and with very different agendas, so I am going to bow out now.

amacca

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no evidence of increasing contact time has a positive influence on learning outcomes? Perhaps you'd care to explain the existence of a thriving grinds industry in this country.

Increasing contact time does work, as does one-on-one tuition (as I suggest should be provided by summer schools).

And are you seriously suggesting that the kind of contact time a student has with a teacher on a one on one grind is in any way comparable to the kind of contact time a student has in a classroom or indeed an enforced month long stay in one on one tuition in your brainwave summer school?

here as I see it at least is the difference (without even getting into methodologies for grind learning and how that discourages problem solving etc etc)

grind: mammy and daddy paying + some of the time student wants the help and has requested it....student gives you their full attention and behaves themselves and tries to do what you ask without shirking/shouting/delaying etc etc = usually an improvement in that students attainment (at least in terms of marks - maybe not interms of creative thinking/problem solving/entrepreneurial skills) in the subject as they are invested in it to some extent

(aside: there are other grinds where helicopter mammy forces child to do grind and child does no better because they don't want to be there and sometimes actively rebel etc)


increased class time: minority of students continue to be disruptive and make this no more beneficial than detention without departmental/management support for what can only be called anti social/thuggish behaviour

summer school: seems like a good idea on the face of it....except having had experience of these things here is what I believe will happen on the ground

the ones who need the summer school will in general include the the most disruptive students of which I suspect there are probably more of than you remember from your time.

disruptive troublesome ones wont want to be there, cause havoc and destroy whatever positive outcomes may be available for those with genuine difficulties that could benefit = parents of genuine kids start withdrawing those that make an effort and are decent because they dont want their children mixing exclusively with shayo, anto or deco whose showing them how to roll a spliff/joyride etc next weekend.


I think what you really may want is your kids off your hands for another month of the summer and if im off the ball with this one then I apologize but I would ask you when making your posts to consider just what your motivation for making your posts might be and how much educational benefit for students your suggestions might make versus mine below


right, here goes bound to be controversial but what the hell!

worked in a private school and a public school during my career


private school: very good educational attainment at least in terms of cao points/college entry (lets leave aside the issue that these were mostly though definitely not all kids from upper middle class backgrounds - some were what people could call "new money" and definitely rough around the edges just as I dont believe this was the main differentiating factor)

and btw I mean very good educational attainment cao wise 80% + got over 420pts in leaving cert

public school: not so good educational attainment - just above average and a bit below in maths


what differences did I notice:

1) did the kids stay any longer at either school...no not really (but see 3 below)...hmmm

2) were the kids at the private school more intelligent than the ones at the public? ......no...and this was not just my opinion...both schools carried out assessments on reading ages...mathematical ability etc on intake ...hmm

3) did either set of kids get more help and grinds?..... well one could argue that the private school kids got more grinds because mammy and daddy are rich and I suppose I would have to concede to a certain extent but this is hard to quantify ....what could counterbalance this however is the fact that the public school teachers gave up time after school to do free grinds for those that wanted to go....amazingly (well possibly only amazing if youre naive) some of those most in need didnt turn up. two teachers came in on saturdays for this btw

4) were the teachers at the private school any better than those in the public school ....nope...not noticeably...same mix of qualifications...same distribution of colleges...same diversity of attitudes, sexes and goals to the best of my knowledge

5) what then was the major difference between the schools I hear you ask? (or perhaps not if youre so blinkered you think extending the school year will solve even a small fraction of the problems with the system)


Well, I will tell you what I think the difference was.


In the private school, mammy and daddy were paying approx 5,000 a year for little fiachra and donnacha to attend..

the school was literally inundated at enrollment time (no student numbers issues for grants here)

this meant that if any student acted up, mammy and daddy were called and debate the legality of it with me if you want, it didnt take long for a troublemaker to be shown the door and mammy and daddy to be refunded their fees

as a consequence class contact time was in general used for just that...class because students knew there would be consequences and just as importantly timely consequences for persistent disruption.


in the public school however, things were shall we say different!

it wasn't unheard of for troublemakers here to be allowed remain until the age of 16 despite being seriously disruptive influences..(aaah section 29 - how I lovd it) .this by the way cant really be blamed on mismanagement by principal imo - more to do with the system as a whole and its unwillingness to face up to this problem as it will cost money to put right and legal battles to be fought etc

result = class contact time in public school same but much less of it actually used to teach pupils ... more of it used trying to entertain/bribe/cajole/discipline etc etc an increasingly larger number of disruptive students when a lid could have and should have been put on the situation much earlier.

anyway back to the moral of the story as I see it..... solving the problems of our education system is not just as simple as your 3 point plan on its own or indeed my suggestion on its own, it really is a very complex issue but it would really help if the existing system inculded a way to deal with rampant presistent misbehaviour that didnt involve a teacher going to the ends of the earth and back over an issue only to have to start all over again with the next problem child and the next and the next...tends to wear them down...it would also help if the issue of parents who in some cases dont know how to parent or in other cases don't want to was dealt with as well.

and imo its highly likely that those PISA stats (if thats what you are actually bothered about) wouldnt be improved significantly by your suggestions without coupling them with a whole load of other reforms...I say why not approach the two together rather than simply shorten the holidays.

out of curiosity why are you not mentioning or acknowledging any of the other problems?

it is also illuminating that irish students were way up that PISA ranking 15 years ago when they attended the same number of days in school as they do now......only thing I can see changing is a gradual breakdown of society with people less and less willing to work hard and patiently to achieve a goal and instead wanting it handed on a plate to them and thinking that evry other sector of society is wrong without even stopping to examine their own section......it always seems to be somebody else s fault.

is it all the teachers fault? or do you just want to focus on that bit


anyway bit of advice if you care to take it......if you have kids and you want them to get on well (at least in terms of lc grades and cao points system)......see how well the prospective school you are thinking of sending them to handles discipline....not how long they keep them in a classroom during the year.

and if for some reason you don't have a choice as to where you send them I would hope you dont blame the school and the "teachers" for the problem..lay the blame where it should be... at the ridiculous framework the school has to operate in not how long the child is kept within that framework.

Focalbhach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Which teacher unions (multiple, clearly) were these?

Focalbhach

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Long holidays benefit only the teachers. It doesn't benefit parents as it increases their childcare costs and it doesn't benefit the children.

The bolded section is a rather large assumption, and one which I don't think is anywhere near as obvious as you seem to think. We're talking about children. They're not miniature adults who should be working 9-5 for 48 weeks a year.

I think if you're looking at this from a "cutting teachers' perks" perspective it's completely backwards. We should be looking at what sort of education we want our children to have, and how to achieve it, and work up from there. It may well be that teachers' holidays could be shortened if there was work to be done during the summer - in your summer school idea, for instance - but that should be a consequence of reform, not the driving factor.

oppenheimer1

amacca wrote: »

And are you seriously suggesting that the kind of contact time a student has with a teacher on a one on one grind is in any way comparable to the kind of contact time a student has in a classroom or indeed an enforced month long stay in one on one tuition in your brainwave summer school?

here as I see it at least is the difference (without even getting into methodologies for grind learning and how that discourages problem solving etc etc)

grind: mammy and daddy paying + some of the time student wants the help and has requested it....student gives you their full attention and behaves themselves and tries to do what you ask without shirking/shouting/delaying etc etc = usually an improvement in that students attainment (at least in terms of marks - maybe not interms of creative thinking/problem solving/entrepreneurial skills) in the subject as they are invested in it to some extent

(aside: there are other grinds where helicopter mammy forces child to do grind and child does no better because they don't want to be there and sometimes actively rebel etc)


increased class time: minority of students continue to be disruptive and make this no more beneficial than detention without departmental/management support for what can only be called anti social/thuggish behaviour

summer school: seems like a good idea on the face of it....except having had experience of these things here is what I believe will happen on the ground

the ones who need the summer school will in general include the the most disruptive students of which I suspect there are probably more of than you remember from your time.

disruptive troublesome ones wont want to be there, cause havoc and destroy whatever positive outcomes may be available for those with genuine difficulties that could benefit = parents of genuine kids start withdrawing those that make an effort and are decent because they dont want their children mixing exclusively with shayo, anto or deco whose showing them how to roll a spliff/joyride etc next weekend.


I think what you really may want is your kids off your hands for another month of the summer and if im off the ball with this one then I apologize but I would ask you when making your posts to consider just what your motivation for making your posts might be and how much educational benefit for students your suggestions might make versus mine below


right, here goes bound to be controversial but what the hell!

worked in a private school and a public school during my career


private school: very good educational attainment (lets leave aside the issue that these were mostly though definitely not all kids from upper middle class backgrounds - some were what people could call "new money" and definitely rough around the edges)

and btw I mean very good educational attainment 80% + got over 420pts in leaving cert

public school: not so good educational attainment - just above average and a bit below in maths


what differences did I notice:

1) did the kids stay any longer at either school...no not really (but see 3 below)...hmmm

2) were the kids at the private school more intelligent than the ones at the public? ......no...and this was not just my opinion...both schools carried out assessments on reading ages...mathematical ability etc on intake ...hmm

3) did either set of kids get more help and grinds?..... well one could argue that the private school kids got more grinds because mammy and daddy are rich and I suppose I would have to concede to a certain extent but this is hard to quantify ....what could counterbalance this however is the fact that the public school teachers gave up time after school to do free grinds for those that wanted to go....amazingly (well possibly only amazing if youre naive) some of those most in need didnt turn up. two teachers came in on saturdays for this btw

4) were the teachers at the private school any better than those in the public school ....nope...not noticeably...same mix of qualifications...same distribution of colleges...same diversity of attitudes, sexes and goals to the best of my knowledge

5) what then was the major difference between the schools I hear you ask? (or perhaps not if youre so blinkered you think extending the school year will solve even a small fraction of the problems with the system)


Well, I will tell you what I think the difference was.


In the private school, mammy and daddy were paying approx 5,000 a year for little fiachra and donnacha to attend..

the school was literally inundated at enrollment time (no student numbers issues for grants here)

this meant that if any student acted up, mammy and daddy were called and debate the legality of it with me if you want, it didnt take long for a troublemaker to be shown the door and mammy and daddy to be refunded their fees

as a consequence class contact time was in general used for just that...class because students knew there would be consequences and just as importantly timely consequences for persistent disruption.


in the public school however, things were shall we say different!

it wasn't unheard of for troublemakers here to be allowed remain until the age of 16 despite being seriously disruptive influences..(aaah section 29 - how I lovd it) .this by the way cant really be blamed on mismanagement by principal imo - more to do with the system as a whole and its unwillingness to face up to this problem as it will cost money to put right and legal battles to be fought etc

result = class contact time in public school same but much less of it actually used to teach pupils ... more of it used trying to entertain/bribe/cajole/discipline etc etc an increasingly larger number of disruptive students when a lid could have and should have been put on the situation much earlier.

anyway back to the moral of the story as I see it..... solving the problems of our education system is not just as simple as your 3 point plan on its own or indeed my suggestion on its own, it really is a very complex issue.

and imo its highly likely that those PISA stats (if thats what you are actually bothered about) wouldnt be improved significantly by your suggestions without coupling them with a whole load of other reforms

why then I ask are you not mentioning or acknowledging any of the other problems?

it is also illuminating that irish students were way up that PISA ranking 15 years ago when they attended the same number of days in school as they do now......only thing I can see changing is a gradual breakdown of society with people less and less willing to work hard and patiently to achieve a goal and instead wanting it handed on a plate to them and thinking that evry other sector of society is wrong without even stopping to examine their own section......it always seems to be somebody else s fault.

is it all the teachers fault? or do you just want to focus on that bit


anyway bit of advice if you care to take it......if you have kids and you want them to get on well (at least in terms of lc grades and cao points system)......see how well the prospective school you are thinking of sending them to handles discipline....not how long they keep them in a classroom during the year.

and if for some reason you don't have a choice as to where you send them I would hope you dont blame the school and the "teachers" for the problem..lay the blame where it should be... at the ridiculous framework the school has to operate in not how long the child is kept within that framework.

I accept everything you say... the point of this thread was to tease out an effective policy of improving the educational outcomes of Irish children. Perhaps my plan was simplistic, but thats what the forum is for, debating amending and adapting, perhaps at the end we can come up with a rounded idea of what needs to be done.

I do see serious problems with implementing a summer educational programme in secondary as often disruptive behaviour is more serious at this stage but I don't believe it might be a problem in early years. Not below 5th class at any rate. More instruction should be there for children that need it.

I also agree that the wider breakdown of authority in society has had implications for education. I remember it from my own days that certain teachers couldn't control the class and it was in those subjects that many students did poorly. So discipline is a major issue but I'm stumped as to how to address it. We could make the curriculum more engaging and practical? We could reimpose an authoritarian regime in schools? Segregate the troublemakers from those willing to learn and accept that they are a lost cause? Segregate disruptive students and place them in more engaging vocational programmes but at the same time would that rule out their future attempts to go to university? Is there something better, perhaps some sort of legal reprimand for both parents and students of those that disrupt? Could something else or a mix of these policies work?

Perhaps lengthening the school year will mean that those who want to do well will do well anyway, and those who have been left behind are not going to be helped by it. I do think that one-on-one tuition in early years could make all the difference, at an age when children are more likely to co-operate. If one-on-one doesn't work for a problem child then the same argument applies to reduced pupil/teacher ratios for that same child. Granted the spillover negative effect is lessened on other children though

oppenheimer1

Leto wrote: »

The bolded section is a rather large assumption, and one which I don't think is anywhere near as obvious as you seem to think. We're talking about children. They're not miniature adults who should be working 9-5 for 48 weeks a year.

I think if you're looking at this from a "cutting teachers' perks" perspective it's completely backwards. We should be looking at what sort of education we want our children to have, and how to achieve it, and work up from there. It may well be that teachers' holidays could be shortened if there was work to be done during the summer - in your summer school idea, for instance - but that should be a consequence of reform, not the driving factor.

I'm not saying abolish summer holidays for children, but surely say 10 to 13 weeks off in the year is plenty. Of course this should be for whats gives the best outcome for children and not a way for taking holidays off teachers. However it is clear that our system is starting to fail be it for social or other reasons and we need to address it if we are ever to build the notional knowledge economy. I think there could be a benefit from one-on-one contact hours for poorly performing children during the month of July, with no school for anyone in August. If we are going to experience cuts in backroom staff and classroom assistants through austerity measures then we need a different flexible approach and get more from what we invest.

So children shouldn't be expected to work 9-5, 48 weeks a year but is it unreasonable to not expect teachers to?

No child should be left behind because of austerity and if longer hours and/or extra tuition is required (I'm thinking particularly at primary) then it should be given

oppenheimer1

Leto wrote: »

Which teacher unions (multiple, clearly) were these?

Teachers have protested to changes in work practices before, the rather shameful closing of schools over schoolyard supervision being one I remember well.

lily09

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

We could make the curriculum more engaging and practical?

If the primary school curriculum was to be followed to the letter it would be the most engaging and practical learning experience for pupils. However when the curriculum was written it was based on a very small class size in a very large room , however the reality is different. But essentially i do agree with you that the children should be the architects of their own learning.

#15

I know I said I'd bow out but I'm still online:o

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

No child should be left behind because of austerity and if longer hours and/or extra tuition is required (I'm thinking particularly at primary) then it should be given

Extra tuition is near the bottom of the list at primary.

Before you even get near tuition time, there are more urgent factors waiting to be addressed
-Learning support
-Availability of psych. assessments
-Lower class sizes
-Space to implement new methodologies

There won't be a single benefit to increased tuition time if the above factors are not addressed first.

We could make the curriculum more engaging and practical?

Ar primary level, the curriculum is a spiral-curriculum based on collaboration, guided discovery, experiments, practical work, engagement with the environment, immersive language techniques and creativity.

The problem is that it is not possible to properly implement at present.

All of the curriculum documents are available for inspection online.

http://www.curriculumonline.ie/en/Primary_School_Curriculum/Introduction/Introduction_to_Primary_School_Curriculum.html

oppenheimer1

#15 wrote: »

I know I said I'd bow out but I'm still online:o



Extra tuition is near the bottom of the list at primary.

Before you even get near tuition time, there are more urgent factors waiting to be addressed
-Learning support
-Availability of psych. assessments
-Lower class sizes
-Space to implement new methodologies

There won't be a single benefit to increased tuition time if the above factors are not addressed first.


Ar primary level, the curriculum is a spiral-curriculum based on collaboration, guided discovery, experiments, practical work, engagement with the environment, immersive language techniques and creativity.

The problem is that it is not possible to properly implement at present.

All of the curriculum documents are available for inspection online.

http://www.curriculumonline.ie/en/Primary_School_Curriculum/Introduction/Introduction_to_Primary_School_Curriculum.html

So we have a good curriculum but not the ability to implement it due to cost. What should we do? Reduce pay and divert it into the capital programme?

Luxembourg has the lowest class sizes yet scores more poorly than us, and they are an even wealthier country... Could our problems be more social and educational policy integration based, rather than a funding issue?

Focalbhach

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

However it is clear that our system is starting to fail be it for social or other reasons and we need to address it if we are ever to build the notional knowledge economy.

The latest PISA rankings have us as above average at science, below average at maths, and average at reading - it's not amazing, but "starting to fail" is a bit harsh.

I think it's also worth making the wider point - because I haven't seen it made here yet - that the "lowering of standards" between 2000 and 2009 isn't as clearcut as a superficial reading would suggest. The report states that there have been significant demographic changes in the school (and therefore, test) population in that time. Specifically, the number of pupils for whom English is not a first language went up substantially, the number of students with special educational needs who were included in the classroom went up, and more students were kept in school who would otherwise have dropped out before the age of 15.

All of these groups would be expected to perform significantly more poorly on the PISA tests. I don't think there's any doubt that there was also some decline in performance among the broader student population, but the population changes have to be borne in mind when discussing the headline rankings. Our PISA scores went down, but we do have greater inclusion of SEN students and fewer early school leavers than in 2000. Put another way, if all we had to do to rise in the PISA 2012 rankings was let those students drift away from education, would that be reflective of a better education system?

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

If we are going to experience cuts in backroom staff and classroom assistants through austerity measures then we need a different flexible approach and get more from what we invest.

No arguments there.

Focalbhach

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Teachers have protested to changes in work practices before, the rather shameful closing of schools over schoolyard supervision being one I remember well.

Can you see if you can dig up a link for that, please? (Not being argumentative - I'd just like to refresh my memory )

I was wondering why donegalfella is talking about half-hours for cheques and fingerprinting machines when neither are anything to do with teachers, or educational reform. I'm not interested in a public service-bashing session.

#15

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Could our problems be more social and educational policy integration based, rather than a funding issue?

Possibly yes.

As we all know, policy in this country is haphazard (Exhibit A: introduce a curriculum that cannot be implemented).

Whether the problem is social policy or educational policy, I don't know. If I had to guess, I'd say both.

oppenheimer1

Leto wrote: »

Can you see if you can dig up a link for that, please? (Not being argumentative - I'd just like to refresh my memory )

I was wondering why donegalfella is talking about half-hours for cheques and fingerprinting machines when neither are anything to do with teachers, or educational reform. I'm not interested in a public service-bashing session.

Granted it was a good while ago, hell I was in school at the time!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2002/0304/teachers.html

I think it was only ASTI that undertook the action

Focalbhach

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Granted it was a good while ago, hell I was in school at the time!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2002/0304/teachers.html

I think it was only ASTI that undertook the action

Cheers.

amacca

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I accept everything you say... the point of this thread was to tease out an effective policy of improving the educational outcomes of Irish children. Perhaps my plan was simplistic, but thats what the forum is for, debating amending and adapting, perhaps at the end we can come up with a rounded idea of what needs to be done.

I do see serious problems with implementing a summer educational programme in secondary as often disruptive behaviour is more serious at this stage but I don't believe it might be a problem in early years. Not below 5th class at any rate. More instruction should be there for children that need it.

I also agree that the wider breakdown of authority in society has had implications for education. I remember it from my own days that certain teachers couldn't control the class and it was in those subjects that many students did poorly. So discipline is a major issue but I'm stumped as to how to address it. We could make the curriculum more engaging and practical? We could reimpose an authoritarian regime in schools? Segregate the troublemakers from those willing to learn and accept that they are a lost cause? Segregate disruptive students and place them in more engaging vocational programmes but at the same time would that rule out their future attempts to go to university? Is there something better, perhaps some sort of legal reprimand for both parents and students of those that disrupt? Could something else or a mix of these policies work?

Perhaps lengthening the school year will mean that those who want to do well will do well anyway, and those who have been left behind are not going to be helped by it. I do think that one-on-one tuition in early years could make all the difference, at an age when children are more likely to co-operate. If one-on-one doesn't work for a problem child then the same argument applies to reduced pupil/teacher ratios for that same child. Granted the spillover negative effect is lessened on other children though

O.K. took me a long time to get back, just in from water transportation duties

Have to say I was amazed at your very reasonable reply above. Had you pigeonholed as a typical anti-teacher basher and for that I apologize, it seems as if you are actually interested in debate.

First thing Ill say is I'm biased as I used to be a teacher and feel they get an undue bad rep at times. Usually from people jealous about the holidays that understand none of the practical difficulties of the job and who are unwilling to admit that an hour in the classroom is in general much more demanding than an hour in your typical office etc (I feel qualified to say this having worked in finance/administration at various levels with a number of companies as well) . I suppose this bias means I cant be utterly detached and objective in what I say but Ill try to be as balanced and objective as I can given my experience and hope this is constructive.

More instruction should be there for children that need it

I agree, and I also agree that money could be diverted from wages and time freed up for this to a reasonable degree.

however, there needs to be an ammendment to your statement I feel.

some people seem to feel that the education system is a panacea for all ills and should fix all the problems of society.

I think your statement should read,

More instruction should be there for children that need it and are willing to avail of it without causing disruption.....

I do see serious problems with implementing a summer educational programme in secondary as often disruptive behaviour is more serious at this stage but I don't believe it might be a problem in early years.

I was a secondary teacher so I have less experience of primary school...the impression I was getting before I left was that more and more students were becoming increasingly difficult to deal with in national school to along with problems such as many not properly toilet trained etc so I'm not sure discipline and appropriate behavior (within reason obviously - we are talking ages 4 and up here) wouldn't represent an issue to be dealt with here either.

So discipline is a major issue but I'm stumped as to how to address it.

the breakdown of authority is one of the main reasons those PISA stats have gone down in my opinion...but that is my particular drum I have been beating all along...I truly do believe it though, you can make of my bias what you will...I believe time will tell the tale in the end.

the reason discipline has become an issue is because the teacher in the classroom has less power than they ever did and the students know it

the first two words out of most troublesome students mouths are "you" and "cant" in that order.

many schools find it hard to remove pupils

1) because of possible (increasingly likely)challenges to the legality of that removal

2) because many schools depend for their grants/number of teachers they can employ directly on the numbers of students they have enrolled. expulsion etc reduces that number and amazingly when I thought about it, there were at least 10-15 hardcore thugs that in all honesty would need to be expelled just to keep the other 20-30 borderline thugs under wraps to a respectable degree - that number used to be much lower but because of our society the problem has grown hugely.

management don't really want to expel pupils for reason 2 above and because they will get no real support from the department

the department imo don't want the schools to be able to exclude pupils unless its really exceptional circumstances as legally every child has a right to an education (no mention of responsibilities there again) and if the numbers that simply arent suitable for mainstream education were exclude they would have to provide alternatives or face legal challenges if they do not....basically to do what seems to be the right thing to me is opening a pandoras box for the current system.


so the system creaks on, with very few actually winning all that much (not even teachers imo as they have at times a ridiculous work environment - have to tolerate stuff you wouldn't believe + take seemingly continuous abuse so lacking in objectivity it seems hilarious at times) - the only winners I can see are the dedicated feckless/irresponsible lifelong thugs who knock extreme enjoyment out of holding others back/bullying...those other messers that take part because they are freed up to do so by the small minority cresting the wave miss out on an education in patience/hard work/values etc where they would otherwise have had to actually achieve and produce something worthwhile from their time in school.


anyway: the way to address this situation? with great difficulty imo.....



It might help if schools actually had power to act quicker when removing genuine troublemakers from the classroom....its currently all about covering your ass when dealing with students......

multiple records of students behaviour, multiple warnings, meeting with parents etc rule the roost before you even consider suspension in the case of persistent (and I mean persistent) minor misbehaviour never mind expulsion ----this leads to a decline in standards of behaviour across the board.

As I see it the main problems are

1) the speed to react to the problem is way way too slow because "the customer" is always right even if they are wrong and teachers are afraid to stand up to these thugs because no one really will stand up for them...a culture of brushing it under the carpet prevails.

2)the consequences for continuous disruption in some cases do not inconvenience the offender or their parents guardian

solve these and you eliminate a large proportion of the problem but that means giving either schools or teachers more real power or autonomy in relation to this problem. eg: perhaps sanctions in terms of reduced dole payments etc


reminds me of an article I read in one of the papers a while back about a certain member of one of our illustrious criminal gangs appearing in court with 50 previous public order offences under his belt on count number 51 - assault and disrupting an A&E - judge gives out a 3 month suspended sentence - he had his own reasons obviously but I dont think anyone could say this was experiencing consequences for commiting crime - neither could they say this lenient approach was working...yet you see the same type of crap in relation to punishing misbehaviour mirrored in a lot of schools because they are hamstrung in their own way.

We could make the curriculum more engaging and practical? We could reimpose an authoritarian regime in schools? Segregate the troublemakers from those willing to learn and accept that they are a lost cause? Segregate disruptive students and place them in more engaging vocational programmes but at the same time would that rule out their future attempts to go to university? Is there something better, perhaps some sort of legal reprimand for both parents and students of those that disrupt?

Attempts have been made and are being made to make the curriculum more engaging and practical - not properly resourced - but the main limiting factor as far as I'm concerned is lack of co-operation----no matter how engaging the material is or how amazingly its taught some students will want to play with iphones/insult each others mas/throw things around the room/incessantly talk/damage equipment/bully the vulnerable etc and are more likely to do so when immediate undesirable consequences for doing so are becoming less and less available in the system....im all for more engaging and practical I'm also all for the correct environment to be engaging and practical...one where students want to engage or have an incentive to do so and those that don't are weeded out.

controversial I know but I actually have to say that segregating the troublemakers from those willing to learn and accept them as a lost cause is probably the way to go if you want those PISA ratings up.

many of the troublemakers have no intention of going to college etc some want a trade etc most want to get the dole...there should be alternative arrangements for them...currently our system is trying to fit square pegs into round holes despite what anyone tells me about lca and lcvp.

standards have dropped hugely due to this imo patently daft notion (from an academic standpoint - it makes sense in lots of other ways) that everyone and I mean everyone has to be included in the mainstream classroom.....no one seems willing to admit that some people do need something else and some people also seem unwilling to admit that an unavoidable prerequisite to making an omlette is to crack open some eggs.

btw segregagtion does not have to mean that these students cant go to college---anyone should be able to go if and when they measure up to the required standard should they desire

at the moment I feel its more of a case of we will drop the standard to the level that will fill our quota for a course and get us those lovely per student fees/charges/registration etc----again its a numbers game---quantity rather than quality....its a bit of scam tbh.....everyone wants to go to college let them go....thats more money for us..hell lets invent a new course or take in more numbers in existing course for some imagined need...thats more money.....then lets act surprised when the quality of our educational attainment goes down..when a degree is nearly watered down to the standing of a diploma.....please.

dont bother with the legal reprimand.....hit them where it hurts....the wallet...perhaps withold child benefits/portions of social welfare etc...give older students a payment or tax credit for college fees for co-operation which will be withdrawn for troublesome behaviour etc

can see the above causing ructions.

other countries have different ways around it...its my understanding that some secondary equivalent schools in Poland for instance force you to repeat a year until you achieve the required standard....repeatedly as it were...supposedly a lot less malarkey goes in class, I wonder why.

Anyway.as I see it.a lot of the problems stem from the removal of consequences from the system....most (not all just most) people dont step out of line in a system where there are consequences to their actions that outweigh and benefits (perceived or otherwise). our system imo has watered down these consequences, removed the impetus and power to implement them and as a consequence more participants are starting to misbehave...and more people are making a living out of researching this behaviour/finding solutions for it/setting up vocal lobby groups to protect the status quo etc rather than identifying it for the cancer it is and nipping it in the bud and accepting the casualties that arise as an unfortunate but necessary consequence of a mildly dysfunctional society rather than what appears to be rapidly approaching a wholly dysfunctional one.

Liberalbrehon

I see alot of people who recognize a problem and want radical changes and I see people who don't see a problem and will fight against any changes.

let me come at this issue from a possibly different perspective.

Here is the problem as I see it.
School + compulsory
separate them and your half way to winning the battle.
School should not be compulsory. If fact it should be opt in. Forcing lots of kids into a classroom to force them to learn things is a little strange if you think about it. Kids are pretty good at teaching themselves what they want to learn and teaching each other. I'm talking about 7/8+ here btw. Once reading, writing and basic maths are learnt, then let kids teach themselves with access to learning resources. Those disruptive kids not being forced to learn what everyone else is having to learn will either be free to leave the class and let parents take care of them or they can stay and do drama, art, read about cars, history,computers, whatever.
Then once they find a subject they really enjoy give them targets for that subject or range of subjects.
If kids are given more freedom to learn rather than forced to learn, there will be better outcomes. Messers johnny and mary you will find will no longer be a problem.
The one other problem with educational policy is the forcing of kids to do things they are not good at or don't enjoy. Even as an adult if I forced 15 middle class adults into room to learn classical greek literature, you would encounter the same problems as in a teenage class. The problem isn't the kids, its the system. Let kids embrace their natural strengths and you will get a very productive society.

Rebelheart

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Looking at the PISA statistics is depressing reading. We've invested heavily in education over the past decade and what we've found is that this has led to a lowering of standards. I propose a new approach, one which will help justify the large salaries being received by teachers. This is likely to be incredibly unpopular with both Teachers and pupils but in the long term could benefit the country.

Cut support staff and increase class numbers.

Increase the length of the teaching year.

Provide Summer schools with 1 to 1 tuition for those that need extra help

The very long holidays were once introduced in order to let children that were from a rural background help out with the harvest and making the hay. This is out of date in modern Ireland. The long holidays at the moment only serve to increase childcare costs for parents and lead to lower educational attainment by children. As it stands Irish teachers work 167 at post primary level and 183 at primary level, far fewer than their lower paid UK equivalent who work a longer year.

Could such a major reform be undertaken under the Croke Park agreement? Would any minister be couragous enough to take on the teaching unions?

Link?!?!

OhNoYouDidn't

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Here was me thinking that the reason teachers have the holidays they have is because we, as a society, decided that kids should have the bulk of the summer, easter and christmas off to, well, be kids. As does every other country in the world.

Schools do not exist as a babystting service.