2 Leaving Cert students cause JC & LC results to be 'Delayed'

FoxT

Full article here:
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/leaving-and-junior-cert-students-finally-get-official-results-29188709.html


SUMMARY

A legal wrangle has meant the students who sat the exams between 2006 and 2012 received provisional results, but not their final certificate.
.
.
.
.
The delay arose after two Leaving Cert candidates with dyslexia claimed discrimination because of the use of an annotation, or explanatory note, on their certificates stating that they had not been assessed on spelling and grammar.
.
.
.
Now the State Examinations Commission (SEC) has issued the 2011 and 2010 results to schools and candidates from other years can apply for their certificates online.
.
.
While a further appeal is pending in the Supreme Court, the SEC has obtained legal advice that, in light of two judicial decisions in its favour, it was acceptable to issue the certificates, backdated to 2006.

=====


This is quite breathtaking for a number of reasons:


1 - it appears to have taken 7 years or more to sort it out.


2 - It should be obvious that if a student is given preferential treatment then the result should be annotated as such, otherwise it devalues the result for all students.

3 - It is being appealed to the Supreme Court? What a waste of time, money, Supreme Court resources etc that is.



I cannot bring myself to have any sympathy with the dyslexic students involved, am I missing something?


-FoxT

anncoates

FoxT wrote: »

3 - It is being appealed to the Supreme Court? What a waste of Blood & Treasure this is!

Come again?

Nodin

anncoates wrote: »

Come again?

Arrr, they have to go and use some of the last haul, so they do, yarrr.

Engine No.9

Probably lads with solicitor daddies and can't otherwise get a "break" due to their disabilities. Just using legal mumbo jumbo to alter their kids results so as to get em in to college. Won't change the fact that they probably failed due to their lack of intelligence above all else. I had a good few friends in school who were dyslexic, all of whom were aware of their condition, not given any special treatment for it and are highly successful careerspeople now. These kids need to wise up.

Mr Benevolent

You've watched Pirates of the Carribbean once too often, OP.

Nodin

pajopearl wrote: »

Probably lads with solicitor daddies and can't otherwise get a "break" due to their disabilities. Just using legal mumbo jumbo to alter their kids results so as to get em in to college. Won't change the fact that they probably failed due to their lack of intelligence above all else. I had a good few friends in school who were dyslexic, all of whom were aware of their condition, not given any special treatment for it and are highly successful careerspeople now. These kids need to wise up.

Did you bother your genitalia reading the article in question?

Seachmall

Is there any practical distinction between the preliminary results and the certified ones?

Tiddlypeeps

If two people competing for a job as a journalist (or something else where spelling and grammar are important) one has dyslexia and the other doesn't. Both only have the LC as a qualification and they both got the same grade in english.

Without the explanatory note on the certificate the employer has no way of knowing that the person without dyslexia is likely more qualified for the job. It would be unfair on the person without dyslexia.

Not that anybody ever asks for a copy of the prospective employees LC results anyway.

Having the LC not be assessed on grammer or spelling due to dyslexia is opt in, the student has to specifically request it. Don't ask to be treated differently if you don't want to be treated differently. Pretty stupid case imo.

Tiddlypeeps

pajopearl wrote: »

Probably lads with solicitor daddies and can't otherwise get a "break" due to their disabilities. Just using legal mumbo jumbo to alter their kids results so as to get em in to college. Won't change the fact that they probably failed due to their lack of intelligence above all else. I had a good few friends in school who were dyslexic, all of whom were aware of their condition, not given any special treatment for it and are highly successful careerspeople now. These kids need to wise up.

I don't think they were looking to have their results changed

Wacker The Attacker

exam ****

Engine No.9

Nodin wrote: »

Did you bother your genitalia reading the article in question?

God no, just my 2 cents based on OPs self summary. Hence use of the word probably. Was never intended as a statement of fact, more an assumption. Agai, I'll refer you to my use of the word probably.

Engine No.9

Nodin wrote: »

Did you bother your genitalia reading the article in question?

God no, just my 2 cents based on OPs self summary. Hence use of the word probably. Was never intended as a statement of fact, more an assumption. Again, I'll refer you to my use of the word probably.

miss no stars

I was wondering why I never got a proper copy. I was even asked for it at a job interview once and gave them what I had received only to be asked for the original, all I could say was "That's all I was given?"

spurious

Seachmall wrote: »

Is there any practical distinction between the preliminary results and the certified ones?

Sometimes, if an error has been made (like a practical mark left out or something) yes, but generally speaking, no.

The certs for the past few years arrived in our school today. Being posted out tomorrow.

Nodin

pajopearl wrote: »

God no, just my 2 cents based on OPs self summary. Hence use of the word probably. Was never intended as a statement of fact, more an assumption. Again, I'll refer you to my use of the word probably.

The dispute is not about whether they passed or failed, its about the addition of a remark noting that grammar etc was exempted during the marking process.

hatrickpatrick

Wait WTF?
I did my LC in 2008, does this mean I never actually got my official results...?
Was never informed / never noticed this at all. CAO accepted my results as-is for two college applications...

Bajingo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Wait WTF?
I did my LC in 2008, does this mean I never actually got my official results...?
Was never informed / never noticed this at all. CAO accepted my results as-is for two college applications...

I did my LC in 2008, sure if you went to college with the results from it you're probably in and out and graduated by now (course dependent) so don't worry about it.

kmepll

If you break your before taking your LC and need a scribe as many students have needed over the years for different reasons then the note is attached,and rightly so

wnolan1992

I knew my results in 2010 were wrong!

No way in hell did I legitimately get what I got.

Screw it, the college has to keep me now anyway. :pac:

Mick ah

It's only right that it is noted that their exams where not marked that same as everyone else's.

Plus, who cares about their LC results a week after they get them. You go to college where no one cares, at all. Or you go to work, where no one gives a shít either.

Jesus, what a waste of everyone involved's time.

Mardy Bum

Seachmall wrote: »

Is there any practical distinction between the preliminary results and the certified ones?

No they have not sent certificates to schools in years. Only the results sheet.

This is very strange.

spurious

They have sent results from 2010 for both JC and LC to the schools. I think anyone who sat the exam from 2006 to 2009 has to apply for their official cert through the SEC website, if they want it.
They won't be sent to the schools.