Strike On ! Proposed New Junior Cert **See Mod Warning Post #1**

endakenny

rainbowtrout wrote: »

You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that's going to happen.

Why do you say that? Doctors, nurses and lawyers, if they are aware that colleagues are acting unethically, are expected to report it to their respective professional organisations. Teachers are able to do the same. You didn't explain why you believe that reporting to the Teaching Council won't work.

endakenny

Jan O'Sullivan said on the Saturday programme that the JCSA involves the spending of more money, not less money, and that the State Exams Commission would also stand over the school-based assessment.

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/saturday-with-claire-byrne/

rainbowtrout

endakenny wrote: »

Why do you say that? Doctors, nurses and lawyers, if they are aware that colleagues are acting unethically, are expected to report it to their respective professional organisations. Teachers are able to do the same. You didn't explain why you believe that reporting to the Teaching Council won't work.

Because the behemoth that is the teaching council doesn't do anything constructive to aid teachers and their professional working environment.

Also when have you ever heard of a situation in the media of a principal being reported to the teaching council for anything? It may not even be the principal where the pressure is originating, it may be the parents.

endakenny

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It may not even be the principal where the pressure is originating, it may be the parents.

The parents' representatives on the board of management won't be able to bring about the sacking of the principal just because the principal is being professional.

Teachers are already subject to pressure from parents with regard to the disciplining of pupils. The principal and deputy principal of my alma mater said that disrespect towards teachers would not be tolerated.

My alma mater is a voluntary secondary school (VSS). VSSs are under patronage of either the Catholic or Anglican church and the work ethic that priests, monks and nuns instilled when they ran these schools means that their discipline is quite good.

It is possible that the State-run schools' discipline is not as good, as the following case shows.

http://www.independent.ie/life/family/learning/union-dumps-teachers-after-row-over-press-release-claims-25889959.html

spurious

As one who has visited both types of school on regular basis, taking classes and training teachers in both, I disagree that the State run sector is any less disciplined than the voluntary sector. In fact, in areas of high disadvantage and in schools who have not been able to pick and choose their students a very tight ship has to be run.

rainbowtrout

endakenny wrote: »

The parents' representatives on the board of management won't be able to bring about the sacking of the principal just because the principal is being professional.

Teachers are already subject to pressure from parents with regard to the disciplining of pupils. The principal and deputy principal of my alma mater said that disrespect towards teachers would not be tolerated.

My alma mater is a voluntary secondary school (VSS). VSSs are under patronage of either the Catholic or Anglican church and the work ethic that priests, monks and nuns instilled when they ran these schools means that their discipline is quite good.

It is possible that the State-run schools' discipline is not as good, as the following case shows.

http://www.independent.ie/life/family/learning/union-dumps-teachers-after-row-over-press-release-claims-25889959.html

Again you are basing your opinion on your experience as a student in one school and at the same time masking sweeping generalisations about state run schools across the country.

evolving_doors

endakenny wrote: »

Jan O'Sullivan said on the Saturday programme that the JCSA involves the spending of more money, not less money, and that the State Exams Commission would also stand over the school-based assessment.

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/saturday-with-claire-byrne/

E-voting machines involved the spending of more money...

km79

I'm sick of having to stop posting in threads/ ignore threads that are very relevant to my working life due to poster(s) outside the profession hijacking them with misinformation/heresay/trolling
another thread bites the dust
my final contribution about the upcoming strike (that's what the thread is about right?).....I think at MOST there will be a single day of strike action before the unions come back with a new "deal"
there is a lot of posturing going on from both sides

killbillvol2

km79 wrote: »

I'm sick of having to stop posting in threads/ ignore threads that are very relevant to my working life due to poster(s) outside the profession hijacking them with misinformation/heresay/trolling

Agreed.

rainbowtrout

km79 wrote: »

I'm sick of having to stop posting in threads/ ignore threads that are very relevant to my working life due to poster(s) outside the profession hijacking them with misinformation/heresay/trolling
another thread bites the dust
my final contribution about the upcoming strike (that's what the thread is about right?).....I think at MOST there will be a single day of strike action before the unions come back with a new "deal"
there is a lot of posturing going on from both sides

Totally agree. Trolls are NEVER banned in this forum. On the other hand, teachers who post here are given plenty of on thread warnings. Why should we have to put trolls on the ignore list? Why can't they just be removed? It's a mirror image of school where you cannot get the disruptive student removed from your class but you as the teacher are always to blame and are just told to put up with it.

acequion

implausible wrote: »

We voted not to cooperate with assessment. I am not conducting formal assessment, nor am I getting them to compile a portfolio of work.

It is quite offensive to suggest that I am betraying my colleagues when all I am doing is teaching my classes. For example, I have just finished teaching "Back in the Playground Blues", I spent a bit longer than I usually would getting the students to compare their first day at school with each other and at the end I got them to recite it and my scheme of work has some coding in it referring to the Learning Outcomes, but other than that, I have taught the poem in the same way. The kids are learning, what exactly is the problem?

You seem to have a right bee in your bonnet about 'fluffy' terminology and are quite dismissive of anything new. What exactly is wrong with two stars and a wish? I have students whose confidence and interest in my subject would be destroyed if I didn't give some positive feedback to them. I wouldn't call that nonsense. Maybe you have excellent students who are fully engaged and will learn regardless. I don't. We are frequently bombarded with new initiatives and ideas, not all of them suit everyone, but as teachers, we cannot be dismissive of all change if it might serve the interests of our students. It reminds me of a colleague at a recent event, who, while dismissing the info that had just been delivered on questioning and mindmapping, stated, "I'll keep teaching the way I like because my way of teaching suits me!" I am teaching 15 years and would hate to get to a stage where I feel I know everything and am not open to change.

The new JC will still have a terminal exam - 60%. I'd still call that good preparation for the Leaving Cert. We can still tailor the course to our students with the prescribed texts, like the LC. I did not post here to defend the new JCSA, though I do think it has merit, but to contradict the notion that English teachers are ignoring the new course.

It is also quite offensive to throw out the standard non teacher accusation that I'm "not open to change". Where did I say that I ,personally,am not open to change? I didn't. Just because some of us don't buy into what's in vogue doesn't mean we're not open to change. Change is an inevitable part of the job and teachers have always shown flexibility and adaptability.Personally, I'm very open to new ideas and suggestions which will improve my teaching.I think it's great to have a large menu of options to choose from when delivering lessons. What I'm absolutely not open to is having some new pie in the sky methodology forced upon me because some bright spark somewhere thinks it's the bees knees. Such is how I feel about two stars and a wish and all the other "fluffy" stuff. If you like it and it works for you,great. But don't assume that my methods of feedback are not equally positive and enriching.

One of the major problems,nowadays,in my opinion,is a standardisation of everything,because that suits the business model that teaching has become.We're all expected to be doing the same thing,in the same way. I very much value freedom to choose and use different approaches and methodologies and likewise to reject what doesn't suit,for whatever reason. The nature of being a professional is being able to use professional judgement. I also do not agree that prescribed texts give the same flexibility.It is proposed that Shakespeare be mandatory for higher level,which I don't agree with. So,a lot of previous freedoms swept away.In the interests of standardisation and uniformity,no doubt. And to the detriment of?????

And please stop talking about the JCSA as a fait accompli,because by doing so you undermine the campaign of which you profess to be a part.

acequion

km79 wrote: »

I'm sick of having to stop posting in threads/ ignore threads that are very relevant to my working life due to poster(s) outside the profession hijacking them with misinformation/heresay/trolling
another thread bites the dust
my final contribution about the upcoming strike (that's what the thread is about right?).....I think at MOST there will be a single day of strike action before the unions come back with a new "deal"
there is a lot of posturing going on from both sides

I completely agree about the trolls,but I hate your cynicism about the campaign. I know that the unions have let us down very badly recently,but we have no other redress and would be a lot worse off without the union.It is up to each one of us to make the union work by using our influence as members. If every member became active and vocal,rather than just complaining and criticising,we would be in a much stronger position.

km79

acequion wrote: »

I completely agree about the trolls,but I hate your cynicism about the campaign. I know that the unions have let us down very badly recently,but we have no other redress and would be a lot worse off without the union.It is up to each one of us to make the union work by using our influence as members. If every member became active and vocal,rather than just complaining and criticising,we would be in a much stronger position.

I am an active vocal member the problem is the majority of members are not . and no amount of work on my behalf before last few ballots changed this.
A new " deal " WlLL be brought back to us after Xmas. We WILL be told its the best deal possible despite teachers assessing own students work still being included and it WILL be accepted by teachers too afraid of losing a days pay/ too shortsighted / too lazy to care about the implications of it in the future.
I was an optimist I'm now a realist

acequion

km79 wrote: »

I am an active vocal member the problem is the majority of members are not . and no amount of work on my behalf before last few ballots changed this.
A new " deal " WlLL be brought back to us after Xmas. We WILL be told its the best deal possible despite teachers assessing own students work still being included and it WILL be accepted by teachers too afraid of losing a days pay/ too shortsighted / too lazy to care about the implications of it in the future.
I was an optimist I'm now a realist

No,you're being a pessimist.Look,I'm not fighting with you. I very much appreciated your contributions during the anti HR campaign and understand that you've more than done your bit and why you feel aggrieved.

But,you're not a clairvoyant and can't say with certainty what will happen. You may well be right. But I hope you're not.

Why don't all of us get writing to our union leaders applauding them for their efforts to date and telling them to hold firm! Many people [myself included] heaped on the pressure during HR and while it ultimately failed and the leaders eventually sold us out,the pressure certainly did no harm.

So,let's do it again!

km79

acequion wrote: »

No,you're being a pessimist.Look,I'm not fighting with you. I very much appreciated your contributions during the anti HR campaign and understand that you've more than done your bit and why you feel aggrieved.

But,you're not a clairvoyant and can't say with certainty what will happen. You may well be right. But I hope you're not.

Why don't all of us get writing to our union leaders applauding them for their efforts to date and telling them to hold firm! Many people [myself included] heaped on the pressure during HR and while it ultimately failed and the leaders eventually sold us out,the pressure certainly did no harm.

So,let's do it again!

Fair enough

paddybarry

There is a palpable anger out there amongst teachers. We are sick of the erosion of our terms and conditions over the past few years. Croke Park hours are soul destroying and we have had enough.

I don't see the Union backing down. I was disappointed with previous actions by the Unions, but I now see they were picking their battles wisely.

It is time to fight back. I strongly believe that Union officials are aware of the anger amongst it's members and will not let us down.

mirrorwall14

paddybarry wrote: »

There is a palpable anger out there amongst teachers. We are sick of the erosion of our terms and conditions over the past few years. Croke Park hours are soul destroying and we have had enough.

I don't see the Union backing down. I was disappointed with previous actions by the Unions, but I now see they were picking their battles wisely.

It is time to fight back. I strongly believe that Union officials are aware of the anger amongst it's members and will not let us down.

I have to agree with this. Unlike the HR far more teachers in my staffroom are clued into this and discussing it. Younger members are trying to join the union. Older members seem to be actually up to speed with the changes unlike Croke park and HR agreements where everyone was asking about consequences

implausible

acequion wrote: »

It is also quite offensive to throw out the standard non teacher accusation that I'm "not open to change". Where did I say that I ,personally,am not open to change? I didn't. Just because some of us don't buy into what's in vogue doesn't mean we're not open to change. Change is an inevitable part of the job and teachers have always shown flexibility and adaptability.Personally, I'm very open to new ideas and suggestions which will improve my teaching.I think it's great to have a large menu of options to choose from when delivering lessons. What I'm absolutely not open to is having some new pie in the sky methodology forced upon me because some bright spark somewhere thinks it's the bees knees. Such is how I feel about two stars and a wish and all the other "fluffy" stuff. If you like it and it works for you,great. But don't assume that my methods of feedback are not equally positive and enriching.

One of the major problems,nowadays,in my opinion,is a standardisation of everything,because that suits the business model that teaching has become.We're all expected to be doing the same thing,in the same way. I very much value freedom to choose and use different approaches and methodologies and likewise to reject what doesn't suit,for whatever reason. The nature of being a professional is being able to use professional judgement. I also do not agree that prescribed texts give the same flexibility.It is proposed that Shakespeare be mandatory for higher level,which I don't agree with. So,a lot of previous freedoms swept away.In the interests of standardisation and uniformity,no doubt. And to the detriment of?????

And please stop talking about the JCSA as a fait accompli,because by doing so you undermine the campaign of which you profess to be a part.

I did not accuse you of not being open to change. Your dismissal of new methods as nonsense, fluff and pie in the sky however, gives a very negative impression. As I have already said, learning outcomes are not "some new pie in the sky methodology" we've already used them. The changes in methodology really only apply to the oral element of the exam and a focus on oral skills (which incidentally are in the current Junior Cert, but have never been assessed) can only be good for students, in my opinion.

A curriculum has to be standardised for it to operate across an entire country. Nowhere in the new JC does it demand that you use certain methodologies, you are free to use whatever methods you want to get your students talking, for example. Shakespeare is more or less prescribed for HL currently and in my opinion prepares them for the demands of Shakespeare at LC level. It's also pretty good for sorting the wheat from the chaff when it comes to levels and is only as difficult as the teacher makes it. Do you feel that prescribed texts at LC level are detrimental?

To me, it is a fait accompli, the new curriculum is in. This is where the unions have failed. I spoke at union meetings, wrote to the area rep and spoke to the education and research officer of the TUI at length in April about the awfulness of the inservice, my reservations about assessment and certification and the position they were putting English teachers in. I repeatedly warned that once the curriculum was in, there would be no stopping it, only room to modify it. And look where we are now - the campaign has only gathered pace in the term after the curriculum was imposed on English teachers. We will not get the JCSA thrown out. The Govt have already given in on certification and offered external moderation, that addresses my two main concerns. If this strike results in anything, it may be additional resources or the creation of JCSA posts, but I will put my house on us not going back to 100% external assessment.

I have a full timetable of English and FETAC modules, corrections, planning and a family to take care of, so I am keeping myself sane by planning for the new, while mixing with the old.

acequion

implausible wrote: »

I did not accuse you of not being open to change. Your dismissal of new methods as nonsense, fluff and pie in the sky however, gives a very negative impression. As I have already said, learning outcomes are not "some new pie in the sky methodology" we've already used them. The changes in methodology really only apply to the oral element of the exam and a focus on oral skills (which incidentally are in the current Junior Cert, but have never been assessed) can only be good for students, in my opinion.

A curriculum has to be standardised for it to operate across an entire country. Nowhere in the new JC does it demand that you use certain methodologies, you are free to use whatever methods you want to get your students talking, for example. Shakespeare is more or less prescribed for HL currently and in my opinion prepares them for the demands of Shakespeare at LC level. It's also pretty good for sorting the wheat from the chaff when it comes to levels and is only as difficult as the teacher makes it. Do you feel that prescribed texts at LC level are detrimental?

To me, it is a fait accompli, the new curriculum is in. This is where the unions have failed. I spoke at union meetings, wrote to the area rep and spoke to the education and research officer of the TUI at length in April about the awfulness of the inservice, my reservations about assessment and certification and the position they were putting English teachers in. I repeatedly warned that once the curriculum was in, there would be no stopping it, only room to modify it. And look where we are now - the campaign has only gathered pace in the term after the curriculum was imposed on English teachers. We will not get the JCSA thrown out. The Govt have already given in on certification and offered external moderation, that addresses my two main concerns. If this strike results in anything, it may be additional resources or the creation of JCSA posts, but I will put my house on us not going back to 100% external assessment.

I have a full timetable of English and FETAC modules, corrections, planning and a family to take care of, so I am keeping myself sane by planning for the new, while mixing with the old.

I am not interested in giving out an impression,either positive or negative. I post here to express my views and my views are that I am not impressed with many of the new methods.If you are,fine. I totally disagree with over standardisation.The goal of which is to make it easier for the employer to control the employee and I personally fail to see how such a philosophy is in any way motivating or inspiring. You seem to sing from a different hymn sheet and again,that's fine.I am not trying to impose my views on you and do not want yours to be imposed on me. I have always appreciated individual style and differences among teachers.It is how I was educated myself and feel it is far more beneficial to students than synchronised course operators, which is what we're steadily turning into.

I disagree about Shakespeare. We have some very weak classes in our school where the kids do higher level at JC level,without doing Shakespeare,who is not the be all and end all.I also disagree that the teacher can somehow make it easy. Shakespeare is difficult which is off-putting to a lot of youngsters. I would do some Shakespeare sonnets with such classes,primarily to prepare them a little for Shakespeare at senior level. In fact several other English teachers in my school [a huge school] do likewise and there has never been a problem when the kids get to 5th year. Those capable do higher level for the LC and those who aren't, don't. Not having studied a Shakespeare play,in no way hinders their development.

I find it a great pity that you have thrown in the towel. As certain posters have pointed out, there is a great deal of opposition to the JCSA and the unions seem to be more willing to represent us this time. Absolutely nothing has come in yet in practice so there is still plenty of time to find a solution. And the only acceptable solution is 100% external assessment.

As with the HR capitulation,the real obstacle is not the union,nor the DES. It's teachers like you who just roll over and give in to each new demand. I'm sorry if you don't like my saying as much,but unfortunately,it's true.

rainbowtrout

acequion wrote: »

I disagree about Shakespeare. We have some very weak classes in our school where the kids do higher level at JC level,without doing Shakespeare,who is not the be all and end all.I also disagree that the teacher can somehow make it easy. Shakespeare is difficult which is off-putting to a lot of youngsters. I would do some Shakespeare sonnets with such classes,primarily to prepare them a little for Shakespeare at senior level. In fact several other English teachers in my school [a huge school] do likewise and there has never been a problem when the kids get to 5th year. Those capable do higher level for the LC and those who aren't, don't. Not having studied a Shakespeare play,in no way hinders their development.

I would agree. I'm not an English teacher. Some students aren't mature enough and don't have a good enough vocabulary to cope with Shakespeare at Junior Cert (as well as many other things). That doesn't mean we shouldn't challenge them, but they can be challenged in other ways. And some are so weak that it really is beyond them.

I typically get a lot of ordinary level students into my leaving cert class who have zero interest in reading let alone Shakespeare, aside from obligatory texts for school I would say that the only thing they read from one end of the week to the next is the Farmer's Journal.

But one thing has stuck with me over the years, is an English teacher who had the bottom class in leaving cert coming into the staffroom one day. The students in her class would have overlapped considerably with mine. Her OL class were basically grumbling about doing Shakespeare and one of them said to her 'When I'm finished here next year and out working on a building site I won't be saying 'John, will thou passeth me that brick' She said she couldn't argue with that.

evolving_doors

km79 wrote: »

I'm sick of having to stop posting in threads/ ignore threads that are very relevant to my working life due to poster(s) outside the profession hijacking them with misinformation/heresay/trolling
another thread bites the dust

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Totally agree. Trolls are NEVER banned in this forum. On the other hand, teachers who post here are given plenty of on thread warnings. Why should we have to put trolls on the ignore list? Why can't they just be removed? It's a mirror image of school where you cannot get the disruptive student removed from your class but you as the teacher are always to blame and are just told to put up with it.

OK Folks, ye've been here long enough to know that once the word troll is thrown around then it's the same old ding dong... so here we go.

1. Have you reported the post? (Answer is no in this case)

The reason for reporting instead of on-thread ranting about mods and the forum is in the charter. TL;DR it's unfair to mods.

2. Has the member used offensive language, been uncivil, spammed, been rude towards other members?

I don't think so.

3. Has the member made generalisations, possibly gone off topic.

Yes I think they have (who hasn't?) after reviewing the thread (we don;t monitor it 24hrs a day non stop so expect a certain amount of leeway and trust from members ) it is fairly low level off-thread stuff .. annoying maybe.. flaming? or flamebaiting? or sinister? I don't think so.

4. Is going off topic or making generalisations a bannable offence?

No way.. a ban would get kicked into the Dispute Resolution Process and the c-mods would wonder what the hell is a mod doing wasting their time banning someone for making generalisations or veering off-topic. (And BTW it would be asked if anyone has reported this behaviour!!)

5. Is it trolling?

I don't know, (there is a very broad definition in wikepedia) could you please specify in a reported post what exactly is the nature of the trolling so I can attach it to a potential ban/infraction procedure.. otherwise it gets kicked back to the mods again.

6. Is this like school?

In some ways, but you know darn well that if you want a pupil expelled and you go to a principal with a case of reports. Griping on-thread about modding is akin to pupils questioning a teacher's approach during a lesson, and I'll bet no one here would entertain that for long.

Also, yes it is like school in the sense that we as teachers want to answer every question... In this forum that is not necessary. Rule 101 of any open discussion board is DONT FEED THE TROLL (if there is one!). By responding you are validating, and perpetuating the members cause. It's simple... just don;t respond. And follow the procedure/charter... you know yourself any case against a pupil the first thing asked is 'Was procedure followed?'.

7. Mods let trolls away with it...

see my ban list below for the last 2 months... and consider all the abusive PM's/appeals/cross referencing members with other fora/conversations with mods to double check/ and tidying up of threads that follow.

http://imgur.com/R6cBI2z

So please, no more on-thread digs at the modding, it isn't tolerated in other fora. It is an open forum so we have to take others into account (no matter how infuriating).. but remember, you can just ignore, this is the best thing you can do to continue on with the topic in hand.

As per usual procedure..

Do not respond to this warning.

P.S. The member- I think that is being referred to!- has offered to sit this thread out.

implausible

acequion wrote: »

As with the HR capitulation,the real obstacle is not the union,nor the DES. It's teachers like you who just roll over and give in to each new demand. I'm sorry if you don't like my saying as much,but unfortunately,it's true.

We'll agree to disagree on the methods then and Shakespeare. While not a major fan, I don't see having him compulsory for JC Higher Level as a problem.

If you read the details of my dialogue with the union, you would realise that I did not "roll over." Before the inservice I was skeptical, I was quite vocal during it about the lack of information and I ranted about the slipshod nature of its implementation with the union, I'm sure I posted in this forum about it too and gave information to other staff and parents as its implementation has been disgraceful. I have been such a dose on this topic that a description of me rolling over is quite funny. I dread to think what words you would use to describe people who have not spoken up at all, who are blissfully unaware and apathetic towards the change and who will blindly go along with the new proposals. (Incidentally, this would describe the majority of my school colleagues)

However, I am also a realist and for my subject, the new curriculum is in now and the latest Govt proposals have addressed most of my concerns. In my opinion, because one subject is already 'in', the time to stop the whole JCSA has passed. Rainbowtrout's concerns about the Science syllabus are the type of thing that should be addressed now, before implementation and maybe industrial action will yield adjustments.

rainbowtrout

Armelodie wrote: »

As per usual procedure..

Do not respond to this warning.

Well I feel there is no other option other than to reply to this on thread so other teachers who post on the forum can see it.

Mods may feel that the trolling is low level, but clearly the teachers on the forum who post here regularly do not. The charter is fed by the opinion of the posters on the forum, the majority of whom are teachers, and it is a forum for teaching (and lecturing). I can't speak for everyone who posts on here, but in my personal opinion I don't think the bans or infractions go far enough, particularly when there are persistent offenders. Maybe the current charter is not fit for purpose and needs to be updated with input from teachers - a bit like the Junior Cert really.

I would imagine that many posters do not report posts because they see mods posting in the same threads and assume the mods will take action. Two mods have posted in this thread in the last 24 hours so I assume have read the posts.

It is in the charter that posters are not to make sweeping generalisations, yet they are made wholesale on this forum by non teachers on a regular basis, and again in my opinion should not be tolerated.

This specific thread is here to discuss strike action and has veered somewhat off topic on to JCSA assessment but seeing as strike action is because of JCSA assessment they are related. Strike action has been mandated by teachers. The unions represent those teachers including the posters here. We are employees discussing our working conditions and what the ramifications are of the impending strike action and JSCA assessment. So it's a bit hard to take when posters come onto the thread and constantly make generalisations about what they saw when they were students. We are discussing our working conditions, and their contribution should have no bearing on that.

If the nurses or the guards were on strike I wouldn't head over to the health sciences forum or the garda recruitment forum and tell them that the changes proposed to their working conditions were fine because I was once in hospital or got my passport form signed in the local station.

As for responding to 'non-teacher' posts. Well we are basically vilified by much of the public and the amount of teacher bashing that goes on in the media is unbelievable. Teachers have few outlets to represent their point of view, and challenging non-teachers online is often the only way. Only yesterday the journal posted their article about our impending strike on Facebook accompanied by the comment 'Christmas shopping has just got busier for two days.' the implication being that we will all be off shopping on the 2nd instead of picketing. Of course many of the comments in response were of the 'there'll be traffic jams all the way to Newry with all the teachers in them' Should we have to tolerate similar in his forum? Personal Issues and The Ladies Lounge have zero tolerance style charters, why can't we?

rainbowtrout

implausible wrote: »

Rainbowtrout's concerns about the Science syllabus are the type of thing that should be addressed now, before implementation and maybe industrial action will yield adjustments.

There is an option for teachers to give feedback through an online survey on the draft syllabus. I made sure they got my (horrified and angry) feedback at the decimation of the science course. I hope other science teachers do similar.

Inspector Coptoor

rainbowtrout wrote: »

There is an option for teachers to give feedback through an online survey on the draft syllabus. I made sure they got my (horrified and angry) feedback at the decimation of the science course. I hope other science teachers do similar.

I found the survey and slated the proposed new syllabus and I'll be bringing it up at the next dept meeting in school

km79

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I found the survey and slated the proposed new syllabus and I'll be bringing it up at the next dept meeting in school

the asti released a statement end of sept saying that any union member who completed this survey was in breach of non compliamce directive ABSOLUTELY DAFT
luckily I had already completed it

rainbowtrout

km79 wrote: »

the asti released a statement end of sept saying that any union member who completed this survey was in breach of non compliamce directive ABSOLUTELY DAFT
luckily I had already completed it

Now that is daft. How can you register your dissatisfaction with the proposals if you can't tell them you are dissatisfied?

Because there are two separate battles going on. Changes to syllabus and changes to assessment. Don't have a major problem with changes to a syllabus if it's done properly. I do have major problems with proposed changes to assessment.

Surely ASTI can see that the main bugbear is the proposal that we assess the coursework and not the actual concept of coursework?

km79

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Now that is daft. How can you register your dissatisfaction with the proposals if you can't tell them you are dissatisfied?

Because there are two separate battles going on. Changes to syllabus and changes to assessment. Don't have a major problem with changes to a syllabus if it's done properly. I do have major problems with proposed changes to assessment.

Surely ASTI can see that the main bugbear is the proposal that we assess the coursework and not the actual concept of coursework?

no they can't. I emailled them on it and they were crystal clear. No compliance with any aspect of it. so basically ignore the appalling new syllabus until it comes in!

rainbowtrout

km79 wrote: »

no they can't. I emailled them on it and they were crystal clear. No comoliance with any aspect of it. so basically ignore the appalling new syllabus until it comes in!

By which time it'll be too late!!!:eek:

implausible

km79 wrote: »

no they can't. I emailled them on it and they were crystal clear. No comoliance with any aspect of it. so basically ignore the appalling new syllabus until it comes in!

Which is what happened with English - wait until it starts and then kick up a fuss.