Finally theres a move for equality in education!

bren2001

later12 wrote: »

Qualitative assessments of students' applications can be anonymous, you know... a faculty doesn't have to know your name to look at your grades individually.

It can be anonymous to a point. Ordinary Joe soap will remain anonymous but the rich kids wont. Obviously your exam number will be used on the letters and not your name, if Daddy want their kid on a course then he just gets their number and tells the person sorting it out. It does open a huge area for corruption.

later12

later12 wrote: »

Then why is that not a problem in the UK

The well-off are still over-represented compared to those from poorer backgrounds there and I thought the gap was widening.

confusticated

SocSocPol wrote: »

You post is both misinformed and mis-representative.
The persoal statement is just one aspect of the pilot programme being introduced, the school attended by the applicant will also be taken into account as will other factors including possible interviews. Basically, it will mirror in part the selection systyem applied to most Mature student applications.
All in all it has to be a good thing.

I really don't think that's a good thing. Anonymity in applying is one of the few things the CAO system has got right tbh. Knowing someone's school leaves the system wide open to discrimination, whether in an "old boys' club" sort of way or as mentioned above, someone possibly getting in just because they were in a disadvantaged school. The interview system in the UK works better than it would here because the population is so much bigger, so the chances of knowing someone involved in the application process are much smaller.

The bonus points for applicable subjects kind of makes sense, but for a lot it's pointless. eg. maths for an engineering course - lots of eng courses need a HC3 in maths anyway, so everybody getting in would get them. You could argue for bonus points for physics I suppose, but then that's not fair on someone from a small school which didn't have enough students to offer physics for LC.

steddyeddy

bren2001 wrote: »

I think what Trinity are doing doesn't improve the system in any manner. Anybody can fake a huge interest in a letter and it I apply to 7 courses in Trinity I've to write 7 letters etc.

What was mentioned on the radio earlier today makes more sense in that bonus points for subjects relevant to the course makes sense. There is no point in giving students an additional 25 points in Mathematics when they go off and study Philosophy. Bonus points in Mathematics should be for Engineering courses, Biology for medicine etc.

Well not biology or mediicne in fairness!

later12

Deleted User wrote: »

The well-off are still over-represented compared to those from poorer backgrounds there and I thought the gap was widening.

The well off are always going to be over-represented, even under an anonymous application system, because the richer parents can afford greater educational resources; or may be educated themselves and see University as a natural progression instead of a privilege, or whatever other reason.

All I'm saying is that the problem of nepotism cited by the poster is easily overcome.

FionnK86

steddyeddy wrote: »

As most of you will have seen Cao points have raised massively this in part is because of the extra points afforded to maths. This has prompted Trinity College Dublin's Dr Patrick Geoghegan to announce the new way Trinity is looking at admissions to Trinity. For years Patrick Geoghegan has maintained that the current system puts the wrong student in the wrong course and that the points system is currently unfair. Coming for the students sitting the leaving cert in 2014 as well as being assessed on their leaving cert results they will also have to submit personal statements regarding their chosen course.


For me the best to come out of this is the consideration of the context of the student. In Patrick Geoghegan’s own words “If a student who got four hundred and fifty points, where they were top of their class and the school didn’t have a tradition of sending people to college. Then that would be a greater more significant achievement than a student from an elite fee paying school who got over 500 points.” The playing field will hopefully be well and truly evened.


To me this is an absolutely brilliant move. It’s how they admit students in other universities around the world. I’m a UCD student not a Trinity one but I have nothing but respect for the way they have opened up university to all students in the past few years with access courses and other programs. It can’t be long before UCD follow suit with this admittance policy. Heres RTE's interview with Patrick Geoghegan about the new policies.



There has been some objections to this but what does everyone else think. Should other universities pick up this?

I too was delighted to hear that yesterday......am hoping my son can gain entry to a medicine course next year.D

steddyeddy

later12 wrote: »

The well off are always going to be over-represented, even under an anonymous application system, because the richer parents can afford greater educational resources; or may be educated themselves and see University as a natural progression instead of a privilege, or whatever other reason.

All I'm saying is that the problem of nepotism cited by the poster is easily overcome.

Indeed and the good thing about this new system is that you have to name these resources eg grinds or whatever.

steddyeddy

FionnK86 wrote: »

I too was delighted to hear that yesterday......am hoping my son can gain entry to a medicine course next year.D

Best of luck to him!

bren2001

FionnK86 wrote: »

I too was delighted to hear that yesterday......am hoping my son can gain entry to a medicine course next year.D

Well they have the HPAT test for this, he will still need the points.

Teyla Emmagan

Rubbish idea. So now you can get into your chosen course just because you went to a 'bad' school, not because you necessarily have the aptitude to actually complete it? What about all the kids who went to a 'good' school who had a moderate level of ability but who really worked their socks off? Will they now miss out to some 'disadvantaged' kid who didn't try as hard as they did?

Parents can make huge sacrifices to send their kids to 'good' (fee paying say, as I'm sure it will come down to a criteria that black and white) schools. They don't go on holidays and don't upgrade the car. So now all that will come to loss in 2014 when they discover that they could have just sent little Annie to the juvenile delinquent school around the corner? Ridiculous.

steddyeddy

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I'd be disappointed to see the points system go which is highly objective, only to be replaced by something which is highly subjective.

Try as you might, but you cannot use power and influence to get into university in Ireland currently. A few years ago in fact someone tried to buy their way into medicine by saying they would pay non-eu fees but was thrown out by the courts. Introducing a letter/interview system is opening the door for the old boys to ensure it stays an old boys club. The idea might be well intentioned but it would be roundly abused.

Its not highliy subjective. The points system is taking into consideration. The only difference is other important issues will be taken into consideration aswell.

later12

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed and the good thing about this new system is that you have to name these resources eg grinds or whatever.

I love that idea; not sure how it could be enforced though. There would be no way of verifying that a student did not get grinds

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Rubbish idea. So now you can get into your chosen course just because you went to a 'bad' school

You're completely misreading the situation, so badly that I'm sure it must be deliberate.

The quality of a school's output is taken into account, it's a mitigating factor where the student's grades are close to, but not quite at a certain standard which may be more easily reached by those with greater educational resources open to them. The Universitys' attitudes, where this practice is common, is "oh well, we have great educational resources here, that student does have natural intelligence & ought to do better than he did at his Community College". I think it's a reasonable method of assessment.

It's not as if Trinity are sending a lorry round to Ballymun Tech and bringing in all the natives for Physics degrees FFS.

starbelgrade

I'm not quite sure how this makes the education system more equal - if anything it's just a form of "positive discrimination".

The points system as it stands - though not perfect by any means - is more of a level playing field. What makes it uneven is the system of education and the variants in teaching and / or school standards more so than the means by which it is assessed.

What would make it more equitable, or at least more career focused is the system that's used (or at least used to be used) to gain entry into the likes of Art and Architecture courses. In this system there were an extra 200 points which could be gained or lost based on an aptitude test, portfolio submission & an interview.

Also, having a weighted points system that gives more credence to relevant subjects is another good idea.

The idea of simply "throwing points at the poor" is an idea that really only could have come from a head-in-the-clouds academic. You can't simply level a playing field by throwing a few obstacles in the way of the better (but more affluent) performers.

steddyeddy

Rocket19 wrote: »

You haven't worded this very eloquently, but I agree with you! :P

What TCD is basically saying is that, if two students get 500 points, one disadvantaged, and one not, they will give the place to the disadvantaged student????
Why?? It's ridiculous. Being from an "elite fee paying school" does not get you 500 or 600 points. Fee paying schools do NOT have better teachers, and they certainly cannot guarantee you points. They may have better facilities, sports, etc, but does that really matter in the end?? The expectation is high in fee-paying schools, study/hard work is very much encouraged, probably more so than some other schools. HOWEVER, only hard word, dedication, and many hours of hitting the books will get you the points in the end.

Well then you better write a letter to the parents of those in private shcool telling them their wasting their money. Your forgetting that private schools also have a better student teacher ratio. I also dont think that they are just going to judge on points and what school you go to. People will have to prove that they are right for that the course their aiming for.

Back to your original point though. Im sorry but someone who went to a school in a rough area, with high teacher to student ratio, where teachers who dont care and still got 500 points had a better achievment than someone who went to private school, grind school and had every other advantage in life. Im glad Trinity are recognising that.

While I completely agree with giving disadvantaged students the platform and help they need to enter college (they have just as much right as anyone, obviously), this is on a whole other level. It's reverse discrimination. While the current system has it's flaws, at least it's anonymous. Whether the student is from Blackrock or Ballymun, it is virtually impossibly for them to get fcucked over, they are just a number to the examiner.

Its not reverse discrimination its simply asking what advantages one student had over another in getting those points. Ie who worked harder. The points system didnt detail all the advantages one student had over another.

steddyeddy

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'm not quite sure how this makes the education system more equal - if anything it's just a form of "positive discrimination".

The points system as it stands - though not perfect by any means - is more of a level playing field. What makes it uneven is the system of education and the variants in teaching and / or school standards more so than the means by which it is assessed.

What would make it more equitable, or at least more career focused is the system that's used (or at least used to be used) to gain entry into the likes of Art and Architecture courses. In this system there were an extra 200 points which could be gained or lost based on an aptitude test, portfolio submission & an interview.

Also, having a weighted points system that gives more credence to relevant subjects is another good idea.

The idea of simply "throwing points at the poor" is an idea that really only could have come from a head-in-the-clouds academic. You can't simply level a playing field by throwing a few obstacles in the way of the better (but more affluent) performers.

Sorry but that notion is complete rubbish. Where exactly are you getting this throwing points at the poor stuff?

steddyeddy

I think people are getting the wrong idea about this proposed system. Its not about "throwing points at the poor" or just writing a letter. In the conference Dr.Patrick talks about in the RTE interview I linked to, they mention a student also putting numerous other references to back up their choice of course. E.g what sort of reseacrh they have done on the course.. What career path would they like ect.

jester77

The whole system is flawed. 2 weeks of exams to cover 5 years work That makes no sense. 600 points doesn't make a good doctor, nor does writing a letter!

There should be continuous assessment from day 1 with students better able to see where their skills match and being able to focus just on those subjects. The end result being based on their progress over the 5 years and not solely on 2 weeks of exams, thus leading to students taking up courses that are a better match.

later12

Rocket19 wrote: »

Fee paying schools do NOT have better teachers

Really?

Not sure what you're basing that on. If it's just your opinion fair enough, but some of us have a different experience. And facilities are down to a lot more than better sports facilities too, I think that's being a little disingenuous.

bren2001

later12 wrote: »

Really?

Not sure what you're basing that on. If it's just your opinion fair enough, but some of us have a different experience. And facilities are down to a lot more than better sports facilities too, I think that's being a little disingenuous.

I think what he means is that fee paying schools do no necessarily have GOOD teachers.

GalwayGuy2

There should be continuous assessment from day 1 with students better able to see where their skills match and being able to focus just on those subjects. The end result being based on their progress over the 5 years and not solely on 2 weeks of exams, thus leading to students taking up courses that are a better match.

Maybe after the junior cert, but for the whole five years? The majority of secondary students act like idiots during the first three years, so do you think it's fair for the first few years (where you're showing off, young and a bit of a fool) to drastically impact on your chance to get further education?

Also, when points reach 500 and beyond, it's a little unfair to show bias towards one person because of their circumstances, wether the bias is for the rich or the poor. It takes a colossal amount of work, no matter how many extra classes or grinds you get.

I think it's a little bit simplistic. It doesn't take into account that children from richer families have more time through not having to work, or more pressure from parents to succeed, or even having a safety net negatively impacting upon your will to work.

jester77

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Maybe after the junior cert, but for the whole five years? The majority of secondary students act like idiots during the first three years, so do you think it's fair for the first few years (where you're showing off, young and a bit of a fool) to drastically impact on your chance to get further education?

It wouldn't be weighted 5 x 20%. The first year or 2 would be used to see where a students skills are suited and as the years progress there would be more emphasis put on their assessments, and not on a one off set of exams.

steddyeddy

According to todays Irish times students will also be interviewed under the new measures. This will be a lot hard to fake than a personal statement.

Diapason

steddyeddy wrote: »

According to todays Irish times students will also be interviewed under the new measures. This will be a lot hard to fake than a personal statement.

Do you think interviews are more "fair" than exams, though? I certainly don't.

steddyeddy

Diapason wrote: »

steddyeddy wrote: »

According to todays Irish times students will also be interviewed under the new measures. This will be a lot hard to fake than a personal statement.[/QUOTE

Do you think interviews are more "fair" than exams, though? I certainly don't.

No nor do I think exams alone paint a fair picture. Some students could afford grind schools and some couldnt. I think the fairest aproach would be a combination of points, contextual data (eg did the pupil go to grind school) and the students interest in the course. Pretty much the way trinity are proposing come 2014.

Diapason

I actually disagree with the "contextual data" part to an extent, but I get it. That would depend on exactly how it's implemented. I still think an interview is a pretty horrible and subjective way to allocate a place, but I'm not full to bursting with better suggestions.

starbelgrade

steddyeddy wrote: »

Sorry but that notion is complete rubbish. Where exactly are you getting this throwing points at the poor stuff?

Straight from the horse's mouth..

In Patrick Geoghegan’s own words “If a student who got four hundred and fifty points, where they were top of their class and the school didn’t have a tradition of sending people to college. Then that would be a greater more significant achievement than a student from an elite fee paying school who got over 500 points.”

I may have paraphrased him slightly, but the sentiment is essentially the same.

TheJak01

I wonder when some of the people posting here actually did they leaving certs. For a start, I'm not sure since when points equal the effort put in. Having received my results last Wednesday, and getting my offer yesterday I can assure you this isn't the case. There are people in my year that studied 3, 4 hours every night, went to grind schools, did extra classes with their teachers and still got 450 points, while there are others, myself included, that put in a bit of work in the weeks before the leaving and ended up walking out with over 550 points. Getting high points in the leaving doesn't require a monumental amount of work for everybody, so getting points to get into courses such as medicine isn't really an indicator of how much work you have put in, and how hard you have tried to get into the course. Yes, work plays a part in how many points you get, but it's not usually the deciding factor.

Fee paying schools do also not necessarily provide better educations than public schools. It is true that they often try promote a more rounded education by throwing a whole host of extra curricular activities at their students, allowing people with an interest in arts and sports to thrive, but at the same time they're not more likely to throw out a barage of 500+ students than any other public school. The number of points you get is a function of your ability at the subjects you're taking, and the work you put in. The people getting the highest points that I know are coming from public schools, so that negates that argument really. I know just as many people getting in and around 600 in my school as I do in the other fee paying schools around me, and the public schools too. Of course, students from a country school which does not offer higher maths are going to be at a disadvantage, and high class numbers are going to lead to lazy students not putting in full effort, but a student getting 400 points doing an hours work at night will get those 400 points wherever he studies. Is getting 400 points a better achievement for him because he goes to a public school rather than a private school? Not remotely in my view. The only advantage a fee paying education might bring him is to spur him on to get study done.

In terms of the CAO, it's not an ideal system. UCAS far trumps it. However, I don't believe we have enough universities in Ireland to make that system work. With UCAS you apply for a course at 5 different universities. You write one personal statement to cover all those options. Say somebody here wants to do vetinary, they have one option of where to do it. At least the CAO gives you further options of what you wish to study, as it's not based on apptitude. If we had 100's of institution offering third level education like the UK does the system would work brilliantly, but there's simply not enough institutions offering the same courses to make the system worthwhile. Unless of course you suggest writing a personal statement to each of the courses you are applying to, which would also be useless. How can I write about how much I would love to do Journalism in UCD, and then write another personal statement about how I'd love to do BESS in Trinity? Writing multiple statements would also lead to further student laziness if it had to be done for each of the courses you're applying to. Don't get me wrong, the system is great in my view, it simply wouldn't work here though.

In terms continuous assessment. It wouldn't work in my view. Teachers help out their students too much. If you look at current project work done by students doing the leaving cert their material is refined thousands of times so that each of them walks out with an A in that section of the course. The only thing that I would consider viable would be further state exams. For example, starting in 5th year you do an exam in each of your subjects at christmas, and summer, weighting the exams accordingly, and making them slightly more difficult as there would be less material to cover. So, for 5th year christmas exams you get 10% of your total grade, summer 20%, christmas of 6th year 30% and the final exams 40%. That might work, but it seems awfully cruel on students that already get stressed enough about one set of state exams, never mind 4. All this project stuff sounds fantastic in an ideal world, but realistically there'll be time and work put in by teachers that will ensure that all work goes in at the same standard, making the whole thing pointless, as they all start off from a level playing field in the final exam anyway, except that results would be inflated a bit. We don't want a system like the UK where an A is effectively meaningless do we?

Quorum

EchoO wrote: »

The "it's not what you know, but who you know" approach is too prevalent in Ireland for an interview based system to work. I think the anonymity aspect of the points system is important. Aptitude tests would'nt be a bad idea though.

I agree, I advocate being just a "number". But I do think apititudes tests can be worked in, indeed Architecture in DIT has done this for years, ensuring that the people admitted to the course have good spatial awareness. CA is also a good idea.

Interviews? No, just no. Not in a country this small. Unless there is some way they can be anonymous.

later12

Quorum wrote: »

Interviews? No, just no. Not in a country this small. Unless there is some way they can be anonymous.

I like the sound of this.

Maybe the candidates could wear trilby hats, fake moustaches, and sit behind a newspaper with eyeholes in it.

Quorum

later12 wrote: »

I like the sound of this.

Maybe the candidates could wear trilby hats, fake moustaches, and sit behind a newspaper with eyeholes in it.

Yeah, and if they have a plummy accent, learn to hide it.