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

km79

http://www.asti.ie/publications/articles/publication-article/joint-astitui-letter-to-school-stewards-re-jc-science-1//publication-back-to/school-stewards/
what brought it to their attention was the information evenings when science teachers were going go to come together and outline their concerns re new syllabus.
an absolute disaster as its coming in either way but now we have no input.
If the cave in materialises and science teachers are then stuck with this new syllabus in which its more important to know the make up of Mercury's atmosphere than the names of the bones in your body or the workings of your kidneys I'll be leaving the union with immediate effect

Inspector Coptoor

I'm all for having astronomy in the new syllabus but not at the expense of human biology, the one part of science most kids are actually interested in

km79

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I'm all for having astronomy in the new syllabus but not at the expense of human biology, the one part of science most kids are actually interested in

my sentiments EXACTLY

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

You may indeed feel that but I've said before to PM me or take it to a C-Mod (there's a new one too!). Doing so on-thread is just not the done thing because it gets in the way of a thread topic (for example, see this post)... Also post up a thread in the feeback section about the way you are unhappy that a forum is being run... HERE's The link . And hey, who knows maybe I'm wrong and totally missing something here but that's the procedure that the rest of the forums follow so I'm just following suit. (I could be wrong)

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Mods may feel that the trolling is low level, but clearly the teachers on the forum who post here regularly do not.

It's ok speaking for others but until folk start reporting the nature of the trolling then as I said it'll get kicked right back to the mods in a DRP case. We can't go on 'feelings'.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

Yes and we did have a new charter consultation process last march. And I know you did contribute with the point about trolls... but again I have to ask to report and be specific about the nature of the trolling. If we were to ban everyone who was accused of trolling in the last CP/CP1/HR thread then that would have been half the teachers in this forum (it was pretty heated you have to admit). Once the troll word is thrown around you're loosing basically.... "you're a troll.. no you're a troll... no you are " and around it goes..

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

If I were a mod all the time I'd be long gone. Sometimes I skim a post and pick up a point for discussion that interests me, then comment on it. The 'work' if I spot it I leave for later as it takes time.. a lot of time. If I can't post as a regular member then that's the life sucked out of it. Same as any other unpaid mod I would assume. You just have to give us the time to respond.. and the best way of doing so is reporting as it goes straight to my email. Commenting on thread is not an efficient or pleasant way to seek resolution.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

Yes but if you respond to a sweeping generalisation then you are engaging in debate. As you can see from my ban actions a lot of non-teachers (and some teachers!) have not been tolerated. If it's low level 'uninformed' questions which teachers respond to then I'll let it run... and hey Im guilty of responding too.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

I'd largely agree with that, but at the same time the strike is going to affect the members of the public (parents mainly) and it will give rise to every opinion under the sun being thrown into the mix in the media, dinner table and in every pub in Ireland. So as we all know it IS a public sentiment game (look at the worm turning over water charges) and how teachers play that is important... the only way to do that is to stick to the issue in hand... and question the teacher-haters about the issue in hand , and to stay focused on the topic. If people don't wish to engage with the core topic then bring them back to the topic .. or ignore them.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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.

Yes but you know everyone is an expert on teaching... that's just the nature of the beast.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

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?

Yes and I agree that the media are spinning sh%%e up into a frenzy... and we have banned numpties for the throwaway comments BTW, and they don;t even bother appealing as they know it was a one off flamebait. But we both know that the type of 'trolling' that is being referred to isn't a teacher-hater 'throwaway' comment, it's just uninformed questions that we beat ourselves up over for responding to. Posing questions in an open forum is hard to prohibit in a charter... and hard to refer to if handing out a ban.

Anyway, "take it to PM folks" as other mods would say.

evolving_doors

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

AS regards the infamous science survey, I think another poster on here highlighted a few examples that the thing was biased towards achieving a certain outcome. So from that point of view I'd like to see a ban on all these survey's as there will be a spin put on it.

Whatever happened to consultation with teachers through meetings... not a done-deal survey to find whatever they want to find. It reminds me of the initial JCSA survey (in 2009 I think!).. they got whatever they wanted.


E.g. If only 10% of the teachers completed it= teachers are largely happy to let the new thing in
or 100% of the teachers completed the survey= teachers are really engaged with the new syllabus... with some voicing concerns.

acequion

implausible wrote: »

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

That is not correct either. I really want to make it clear to everybody reading this that the idea of the JCSA being "in" is a perception,not a reality on the ground. Yes,the DES will say it's in,but nothing is in unless it's fully implemented.

To repeat what I said earlier. I teach in a large school in a large town. Not one English teacher in this town is recognising or implementing the JCSA in first year English. In my school, all English teachers agreed at the end of last year after the first ballot to continue as normal with the old book and that is exactly what we are doing.If some English teachers around the country have thrown in the towel or decided to start implementing the new course despite the concerns and opposition of the majority,then that is very regrettable. But as far as we are concerned the JCSA has not started and that is why we have voted to take strike action.

I would urge my collegues in science to put up one hell of a fight.

killbillvol2

Armelodie wrote: »

It's ok speaking for others but until folk start reporting the nature of the trolling then as I said it'll get kicked right back to the mods in a DRP case. We can't go on 'feelings'.

Well I reported a particularly vivid example of sweeping generalisation/general BS in the last few hours. I could probably report every post by the same poster but what's the point?

evolving_doors

killbillvol2 wrote: »

Well I reported a particularly vivid example of sweeping generalisation/general BS in the last few hours. I could probably report every post by the same poster but what's the point?

Yes, thanks, and as a result of reporting, the member is no longer taking part in this discussion. Thats the point.

This is the ONLY reported post I got.

Jamfa

acequion wrote: »

That is not correct either. I really want to make it clear to everybody reading this that the idea of the JCSA being "in" is a perception,not a reality on the ground. Yes,the DES will say it's in,but nothing is in unless it's fully implemented.

To repeat what I said earlier. I teach in a large school in a large town. Not one English teacher in this town is recognising or implementing the JCSA in first year English. In my school, all English teachers agreed at the end of last year after the first ballot to continue as normal with the old book and that is exactly what we are doing.If some English teachers around the country have thrown in the towel or decided to start implementing the new course despite the concerns and opposition of the majority,then that is very regrettable. But as far as we are concerned the JCSA has not started and that is why we have voted to take strike action.

I would urge my collegues in science to put up one hell of a fight.

I wonder is there any precedence for a group of teachers not teaching the new curriculum and following one that doesn't exist anymore. Something needs to be sorted out soon because there won't be a Junior Cert English exam in 2017 for your students to sit.

MrJones1973

Caiseoipe19 wrote: »

The revised payscale for new entrants and abolition of allowances were brought in for future entrants to the profession. So how could they have stood up for themselves at meetings before they were even qualified?

The people worst affected at present are those that qualified in 2012, 2013 and 2014, non of whom could have been members of the ASTI at the time of the cuts.
Yes, they should attend meetings after qualifying in order to fight for the cuts to be reversed, but the ASTI shouldn't have accepted them in the first place. They have every right to feel aggrieved.

Not really my point. Im not talking about the past. Im talking about the future. The ASTI was against all of those proposals. All. The CEC told members to reject HR. Only about 10% of CEC are under 30. What did the members do-accept it! Many young teachers voted for HR to get CID and to avoid a strike. You cant say they all voted against as I know that many did. They told me.
So the future is all we have. Trust me if one more young teacher turned up at a branch meeting you would have change. I appreciate people have mortgages and kids-but its like an operation you must have. Keep putting it off and off and it will get you in the end.
Im tired of excuses-get off your backsides and take over the union.

implausible

acequion wrote: »

That is not correct either. I really want to make it clear to everybody reading this that the idea of the JCSA being "in" is a perception,not a reality on the ground. Yes,the DES will say it's in,but nothing is in unless it's fully implemented.

"Not a reality on the ground" is based on your own experience.

The Department circular is here and it says:

The new specification for Junior Cycle English will be implemented in all schools from
September 2014. The specification is available at www.juniorcycle.ie.

Neither the TUI or ASTI have instructed members not to cooperate with JCSA English. The only point in the directive from both unions that is relevant is:

4. Not to engage in any aspect of school-based assessment for the purpose of the Junior Cycle Student Award (JCSA).

I have repeatedly had this clarified at union meetings, once with John MacGabhann present.

The Dept has instructed teachers to teach it; the unions have not told teachers not to teach it. Our conditions of service oblige us to carry out the instructions of the Minister for Education.

Pwpane

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Not really my point. Im not talking about the past. Im talking about the future. The ASTI was against all of those proposals. All. The CEC told members to reject HR. Only about 10% of CEC are under 30. What did the members do-accept it! Many young teachers voted for HR to get CID and to avoid a strike. You cant say they all voted against as I know that many did. They told me.
So the future is all we have. Trust me if one more young teacher turned up at a branch meeting you would have change. I appreciate people have mortgages and kids-but its like an operation you must have. Keep putting it off and off and it will get you in the end.
Im tired of excuses-get off your backsides and take over the union.

Well said.

I figure that in the Celtic Tiger that unions just went out of fashion - 'sure we don't need them anymore, they're just cranks that are trying to bring down good employers.' Young people stopped joining unions and the gains made previously by unions more or less continued in place. There were some cracks, as with Irish Ferries, but the proverbial didn't hit the fan until the recession when employers were now free to do what they liked, up as far as the govt with it's FEMPI act.

Unions are about members of the union acting collectively for their own good when one person on their own has no power. They're not all-powerful or all-good. But they're one hell of a lot better than facing the system on your own.

When I joined the union in the eighties, everybody joined. And we achieved a hell of a lot.

Young teachers and part-time teachers need to take on the system and do the same. Those that I've spoken to seem to feel paralysed. Some are still not in the union so are totally powerless. Some have joined but won't attend meetings so their voices are not heard and their abilities are not used. A few do attend and help but often they cannot speak openly as peer pressure is still negative. This means that the union is ineffective even their own schools - where it can do a lot.

You need to do what we did and achieve what you want.

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

I wonder is there any precedence for a group of teachers not teaching the new curriculum and following one that doesn't exist anymore. Something needs to be sorted out soon because there won't be a Junior Cert English exam in 2017 for your students to sit.

I really am beginning to wonder what language I've been posting in or perhaps what planet some posters are living on! :rolleyes:

Are certain posters not aware that there has been widespread opposition to the JCSA,not least by the very unions we love to lambaste?

Are certain posters not aware that the unions appealed to the DES to postpone the introduction of the JCSA to allow time to reach a more workable and mutually acceptable solution?

Are certain posters not aware that the DES has persistently refused that reasonable request, despite the retiring of the architect of the JCSA?

Are certain posters not aware that last May [or perhaps April?] the unions passed a vote of non compliance with the JCSA as a result of DES intransigence?

And finally,are certain posters not aware that unions passed another recent vote to ratchet up the industrial action,again as a result of DES intransigence?

Now,yes there are some grey areas in the above questions.Another poster has already posted the exact union directive,which technically does not ban members from teaching the new course. However,in the light of what I have just clarified above,how can anyone claim that there is a new course up and running when there patently is not?

If we must split hairs on this, we are talking about first year English .Period. The actual practice of the JCSA doesn't really kick in until second year English.So it's not as though we are revolutionising the wheel by carrying on as before. There isn't really a first year English course,to speak of,it's mainly an introduction to what they will later study in depth.And some vitally important work on overall literacy.

It is also not as if a particular group of teachers decided to get all bolshy. Even if I,personally,were not very opposed to the JCSA,you can't teach a new course without the proper infrastructure and proper training. The in services we were receiving were a joke,at best, and there is zero infrastructure or forward planning in place for the new course. So,like sensible people, the |English teachers in my school,and to my knowledge,around my town and county [source:branch meeting] decided to continue as normal,while awaiting a solution.

In my opinion,any teacher,who despite all that,is actually following this new course either out of fear of breach of contract,or total disregard for majority concerns,should hang his/her head in shame.

While HR concerned teachers working conditions for the foreseeable future,this concerns the future of Irish education,the education of our children and grandchildren. It has enormous consequences for our society and goes much further than the kids sitting junior English in 2017.

acequion

implausible wrote: »

The Dept has instructed teachers to teach it; the unions have not told teachers not to teach it. Our conditions of service oblige us to carry out the instructions of the Minister for Education.

No point in asking you to read my last post because you and other posters are only interested in doggedly obeying orders. Talk about tunnel vision!

Certain people would obey anything because being obedient is more important to them than sticking their necks out and standing up for what is right.

My big fear is that such people with their compliance and narrow minded obedience will roll over and allow this JCSA and worse down the line,to come in,as indeed,they have already.

But,perhaps,enough of us will have the guts to face this one down.

I appeal to my collegues to fight. I will be retired in about 8 years. Many of you will have to work this farce, on top of everything else you've endured recently,for many years to come.

Jamfa

acequion wrote: »

I really am beginning to wonder what language I've been posting in or perhaps what planet some posters are living on! :rolleyes:

Are certain posters not aware that there has been widespread opposition to the JCSA,not least by the very unions we love to lambaste?

Are certain posters not aware that the unions appealed to the DES to postpone the introduction of the JCSA to allow time to reach a more workable and mutually acceptable solution?

Are certain posters not aware that the DES has persistently refused that reasonable request, despite the retiring of the architect of the JCSA?

Are certain posters not aware that last May [or perhaps April?] the unions passed a vote of non compliance with the JCSA as a result of DES intransigence?

And finally,are certain posters not aware that unions passed another recent vote to ratchet up the industrial action,again as a result of DES intransigence?

Now,yes there are some grey areas in the above questions.Another poster has already posted the exact union directive,which technically does not ban members from teaching the new course. However,in the light of what I have just clarified above,how can anyone claim that there is a new course up and running when there patently is not?

If we must split hairs on this, we are talking about first year English .Period. The actual practice of the JCSA doesn't really kick in until second year English.So it's not as though we are revolutionising the wheel by carrying on as before. There isn't really a first year English course,to speak of,it's mainly an introduction to what they will later study in depth.And some vitally important work on overall literacy.

It is also not as if a particular group of teachers decided to get all bolshy. Even if I,personally,were not very opposed to the JCSA,you can't teach a new course without the proper infrastructure and proper training. The in services we were receiving were a joke,at best, and there is zero infrastructure or forward planning in place for the new course. So,like sensible people, the |English teachers in my school,and to my knowledge,around my town and county [source:branch meeting] decided to continue as normal,while awaiting a solution.

In my opinion,any teacher,who despite all that,is actually following this new course either out of fear of breach of contract,or total disregard for majority concerns,should hang his/her head in shame.

While HR concerned teachers working conditions for the foreseeable future,this concerns the future of Irish education,the education of our children and grandchildren. It has enormous consequences for our society and goes much further than the kids sitting junior English in 2017.

That's all fine but who decides the curriculum in schools? From what you're saying you & other teachers have chosen to teach a curriculum which whether you like it or not doesn't exist anymore according to the DES. Has this happened before where teachers continue with a curriculum despite it being changed? Are some maths teachers in <MOD SNIP> still teaching the old Maths coyrse?

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

That's all fine but who decides the curriculum in schools? From what you're saying you & other teachers have chosen to teach a curriculum which whether you like it or not doesn't exist anymore according to the DES. Has this happened before where teachers continue with a curriculum despite it being changed? Are some maths teachers in <MOD SNIP> still teaching the old Maths coyrse?

Are you a teacher?

Jamfa

acequion wrote: »

Are you a teacher?

Yes

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

Yes

Thank you for clarifying that as your posts don't make that clear. Your question about maths is totally irrelevant to this thread.

I have made it very clear that I very much regret the attitude of posters who post along the lines of "the JCSA is in", "the horse has bolted", "It's a foregone conclusion" "DES instructions" yada, yada, yada.

Nothing would ever be achieved in society if such tunnel visioned attitudes won the day. Also,I really see no point in being a member of a union with that attitude.

However I have posted enough on this particular matter. No point in constantly repeating oneself.

acequion

Pwpane wrote: »

Well said.

I figure that in the Celtic Tiger that unions just went out of fashion - 'sure we don't need them anymore, they're just cranks that are trying to bring down good employers.' Young people stopped joining unions and the gains made previously by unions more or less continued in place. There were some cracks, as with Irish Ferries, but the proverbial didn't hit the fan until the recession when employers were now free to do what they liked, up as far as the govt with it's FEMPI act.

Unions are about members of the union acting collectively for their own good when one person on their own has no power. They're not all-powerful or all-good. But they're one hell of a lot better than facing the system on your own.

When I joined the union in the eighties, everybody joined. And we achieved a hell of a lot.

Young teachers and part-time teachers need to take on the system and do the same. Those that I've spoken to seem to feel paralysed. Some are still not in the union so are totally powerless. Some have joined but won't attend meetings so their voices are not heard and their abilities are not used. A few do attend and help but often they cannot speak openly as peer pressure is still negative. This means that the union is ineffective even their own schools - where it can do a lot.

You need to do what we did and achieve what you want.

Excellent post. Totally agree.

gaiscioch

Now that state certification is reinstated and that 60% of the JC will be externally assessed, I'm going to put my head above the parapet here and ask: what's so bad about 40% of the students' results being continuous assessment?

Surely it would help teachers facing discipline issues in their classroom, while also assisting those weak kids who cannot take the burden of exam pressure? (yes, of course it is being done to save money but that doesn't necessarily mean it has no merit)

Actually, as second years usually seem to be the bane of teachers in all schools, perhaps if we had some sort of link between 2nd and 3rd year results we might have a general improvement in behaviour in 2nd years also?

amacca

gaiscioch wrote: »

Now that state certification is reinstated and that 60% of the JC will be externally assessed, I'm going to put my head above the parapet here and ask: what's so bad about 40% of the students' results being continuous assessment?

Surely it would help teachers facing discipline issues in their classroom, while also assisting those weak kids who cannot take the burden of exam pressure? (yes, of course it is being done to save money but that doesn't necessarily mean it has no merit)

Actually, as second years usually seem to be the bane of teachers in all schools, perhaps if we had some sort of link between 2nd and 3rd year results we might have a general improvement in behaviour in 2nd years also?

I think its naive to think that any of this in its current form will improve our lot at all or benefit educational outcomes….

Project work in science certainly didn't seem have that effect. Not overwhelming majority but certainly the majority of students in my experience (not just my classes in the past) refuse to make anything resembling a genuine effort or take responsibility for their own work….I don't agree that its down to the way they were taught either….simple things were being asked for and not complied with….its mostly a cultural thing afaic…..there is a widespread culture of entitlement, laziness and blame anyone but yourself if the going gets hard out there.

I would suspect many teachers are caught in a catch-22 situation where they have to "guide" them sleepwalking through it….it gobbles up vast quantities of teaching time with very questionable benefit imo…..even the layout of the reporting booklet looks to me as if it was cobbled together by a simpleton with a buzzword booklet and no real world experience of actually teaching an average group of 13-15 year olds.

I wouldn't have any problem with a component of continuous assessment from first year on if theres a way to assess it 100% externally (potentially costly though I suppose without investment in some sort of automation, proper ICT infrastructure and computer techs etc to keep things running)…I think theres a place for that and a final written exam in every subject tbh but i would be against the way the clowns (as I see it, although they do seem to manage to feather their own nests quite well) at the top are organising/pushing things through…..I think its fair to say the whole thing is an ill thought out mess….it smacks of reform for reforms sake…or reforms that perhaps should take place but the practicalities and the long term consequences in this system haven't been thought through properly at all…………….

I'd also be very wary of agreeing to or supporting anything where the full details of exactly what is planned are not being made public….syllabi + details are very vague….worryingly vague (at least to me)…..training non-existent afaic and the only place it seems you have a voice is in biased online surveys.

evolving_doors

amacca wrote: »

I think its naive to think that any of this in its current form will improve our lot at all or benefit educational outcomes….

Project work in science certainly didn't seem have that effect. Not overwhelming majority but certainly the majority of students in my experience (not just my classes in the past) refuse to make anything resembling a genuine effort or take responsibility for their own work….I don't agree that its down to the way they were taught either….simple things were being asked for and not complied with….its mostly a cultural thing afaic…..there is a widespread culture of entitlement, laziness and blame anyone but yourself if the going gets hard out there.

I would suspect many teachers are caught in a catch-22 situation where they have to "guide" them sleepwalking through it….it gobbles up vast quantities of teaching time with very questionable benefit imo…..even the layout of the reporting booklet looks to me as if it was cobbled together by a simpleton with a buzzword booklet and no real world experience of actually teaching an average group of 13-15 year olds.

I wouldn't have any problem with a component of continuous assessment from first year on if theres a way to assess it 100% externally (potentially costly though I suppose without investment in some sort of automation, proper ICT infrastructure and computer techs etc to keep things running)…I think theres a place for that and a final written exam in every subject tbh but i would be against the way the clowns (as I see it, although they do seem to manage to feather their own nests quite well) at the top are organising/pushing things through…..I think its fair to say the whole thing is an ill thought out mess….it smacks of reform for reforms sake…or reforms that perhaps should take place but the practicalities and the long term consequences in this system haven't been thought through properly at all…………….

I'd also be very wary of agreeing to or supporting anything where the full details of exactly what is planned are not being made public….syllabi + details are very vague….worryingly vague (at least to me)…..training non-existent afaic and the only place it seems you have a voice is in biased online surveys.

Id agree, 40% dont mean diddly until I know whats going on. Im not am English teacher but from the teachers (and university rep I know of) who went on the course they found it lacking in substance.

Seeing as someone mentioned maths... how come the English wasnt phased in gradually with inservices for each change in the syllabus...

If they did to the maths course what they did to the English ' rollout' it would have been scrapped from the getgo.

Why is English any different?

Answer is... Ruairi Quinn ramming it through + education on the cheap..

Boober Fraggle

gaiscioch wrote: »

Now that state certification is reinstated and that 60% of the JC will be externally assessed, I'm going to put my head above the parapet here and ask: what's so bad about 40% of the students' results being continuous assessment?

I think the 40% could potentially be a lot of work for some people. Anyone who has corrected for the sec will know how annoying revisions are, can you imagine correcting coursework, without a correcting conference, having an external examiner come in and monitor 10-15% of that, and then tell you how your marking is not in line with the standard (which you didn't know in the first place) and then have to go back over the other 85-90% to bring them in line with the standard. Will they be remonitored then? Will the external monitor be expecting that you will stick to a curve and have new figures for them after the process?

I think that's a lot of work for any teacher to take on, especially considering some teachers could have 3 junior cert classes in different subjects in any given year.

implausible

acequion wrote: »

In my opinion,any teacher,who despite all that,is actually following this new course either out of fear of breach of contract,or total disregard for majority concerns,should hang his/her head in shame.

acequion wrote: »

No point in asking you to read my last post because you and other posters are only interested in doggedly obeying orders. Talk about tunnel vision!

Certain people would obey anything because being obedient is more important to them than sticking their necks out and standing up for what is right.

My big fear is that such people with their compliance and narrow minded obedience will roll over and allow this JCSA and worse down the line,to come in,as indeed,they have already.

Don't get so personal. You know nothing about any other element of my life, so don't generalise that my desire to get on with a new course is some kind of a character flaw.

If the only reason I was introducing new elements in to my teaching was out of fear, then I would perhaps deserve emotive descriptions such as "narrow-minded obedience" and "doggedly obeying orders." You seem to have missed the point that I argued my point and made my views known, but the course is now in, my concerns seem to have been addressed by the new proposals, and I can see the merits in the new course. I am enjoying teaching my students and I can see how it will benefit them.

But I suppose this is pure selfishness and "total disregard for majority concerns.":rolleyes:

gammy_knees

Here's something I read from the Telegraph in the UK. It's about maths teaching in England and why they are now looking to China to raise standards. I post this as we like to mimick the UK.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10691030/Chinese-teachers-sent-into-English-schools-to-boost-results.html

Some points from the article:
“Good maths comes with constant practise but there seems to be an aversion to practise in this country. We have a lot to learn from China....

The use of “word problems” was “dominant in England” while teachers in Shanghai “emphasise deep conceptual understanding”, he said.

Anyone for Project Maths!

Take a look at the comments section as well. Some are excellent.
"Having taught in China, Korea and Japan at various age levels I can honestly say that the superior "Chinese methods" they use are simply British traditional methods shorn of the political seesawing and endless tinkering with the curriculum that accompanies so called "progressive" state school education today in Britain."

Substitute Irish for British and you have Irish education in 10-15 yrs time!!

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

Don't get so personal. You know nothing about any other element of my life, so don't generalise that my desire to get on with a new course is some kind of a character flaw.

If the only reason I was introducing new elements in to my teaching was out of fear, then I would perhaps deserve emotive descriptions such as "narrow-minded obedience" and "doggedly obeying orders." You seem to have missed the point that I argued my point and made my views known, but the course is now in, my concerns seem to have been addressed by the new proposals, and I can see the merits in the new course. I am enjoying teaching my students and I can see how it will benefit them.

But I suppose this is pure selfishness and "total disregard for majority concerns.":rolleyes:

I'll agree to disagree with you on your standpoint and the union directive etc...

But what I am wondering about is the 'time element' that would be given over for assessment (and the paperwork that would inevitably ensue)...

Do you know what sort of paperwork demands are expected of Junior cert teachers for the JCSA...

Is it to be done on weekends?
When we go home?
Do we get time off or substitution provided (or can we offset it against CP hours)?

I simply can't see why I should accept this until I know how much more I'm going to spend correcting/logging/reflecting/writing reports/dealing with appeals/dealing with angry parents/resetting tests for the ones who didn't do so well or couldn;t give a sh%%e/ re-adjusting grades to get me in line for a promotion.

It's tantamount to telling us "right folks ye're all coming in in June" and some folk say.. "grand ya shur there's nothing we can do about it".

Unless I'm missing something, because it sure wont be a case of 'just give them the tests you normally give them and enter the results on a special database.. only take a few mins extra, whats the fuss'.

I'd just like to know.. whats the projected time cost on this?

mirrorwall14

As a music teacher I'm hugely concerned about this proposed 40% as I asume it will be the practical component. Essentially what it would mean is that music students would NEVER be externally assessed until their LC performance exam? That's completely bonkers! And there's usually only one music teacher in a school so they will literally have had the same person assessing them for six years until that one external assessment in LC which is worth 50% of a high stake exam.

Music Practical evaluation is a very subjective enterprise even at a classroom level and there are no marking schemes or even guidelines published at JC even for the current curriculum.

I would worry about applying generalised standards and marking schemes to such exams without any marking conference for standards? I'm sure art teachers and other subjects are going to be in a similar situation.

Similarly what will be the story with subjects like maths where there has never been a written element as such. What will the 40% consist of? Class tests sort of ideas? Or are teachers (who may never have corrected an essay in their career) going to have to correct projects on jobs in mathatics etc?

It is far too vague to say 'oh well we'll do 60%' when they haven't told us what the 40% will be?!

Jamfa

Armelodie wrote: »

I'll agree to disagree with you on your standpoint and the union directive etc...

But what I am wondering about is the 'time element' that would be given over for assessment (and the paperwork that would inevitably ensue)...

Do you know what sort of paperwork demands are expected of Junior cert teachers for the JCSA...

Is it to be done on weekends?
When we go home?
Do we get time off or substitution provided (or can we offset it against CP hours)?

I simply can't see why I should accept this until I know how much more I'm going to spend correcting/logging/reflecting/writing reports/dealing with appeals/dealing with angry parents/resetting tests for the ones who didn't do so well or couldn;t give a sh%%e/ re-adjusting grades to get me in line for a promotion.

It's tantamount to telling us "right folks ye're all coming in in June" and some folk say.. "grand ya shur there's nothing we can do about it".

Unless I'm missing something, because it sure wont be a case of 'just give them the tests you normally give them and enter the results on a special database.. only take a few mins extra, whats the fuss'.

I'd just like to know.. whats the projected time cost on this?

Well in the new English course there are two school-based assessments. At the end of 2nd year students will make a 3 minute presentation on a topic they have researched/studied. This is to take place during school time in May and could replace the traditional house exam for English. Moderation would also take place before school finishes at the end of May.
The other assessment is for the collection of student texts. Basically this involves having a portfolio of their written work collected over 2nd year up to Christmas of 3rd year. Teachers assign & correct as they probably would normally do & 2 pieces in different genres are selected to submit for grading. The two pieces will be corrected & moderated around Christmas & during normal school time. A selection of both of the school based assessments will be subject to external moderation.
The final exam will be set & marked by the SEC & the results of the exam & school-based assessments will be combined to form the state certified grade at JC.
These changes shouldn't make much difference to teacher workload & I imagine something similar is envisaged for other subjects. The Minister has offered to discuss these arrangements if/when talks resume.

byhookorbycrook

I'm primary, so here's my two cents. Since results of standardised tests started to be sent home, suddenly, they are, to some parents, the be all and end all. The DES asked us to submit results for different classes and we were assured it was only for statistical reasons.

Roll on a few years and now we learn that there is a proposal that these results will be used in part to calculate SEN support for schools and in doing so will punish schools that are doing "well."

If secondary schools accept the 40% , the year after it may well be 50% , the following year 60% etc. Why must we ape the failed English system constantly ? I know a number of teachers in England and they have teaching assistants who take over the class to allow the teachers time for the crazy amount of paperwork they have to do. Seeing as we can't even fund meaningful SNA provision, we won't be getting TAs any time soon.

Fair play to the secondary teachers for standing up for their pupils and themselves.

km79

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

I'm primary, so here's my two cents. Since results of standardised tests started to be sent home, suddenly, they are, to some parents, the be all and end all. The DES asked us to submit results for different classes and we were assured it was only for statistical reasons.

Roll on a few years and now we learn that there is a proposal that these results will be used in part to calculate SEN support for schools and in doing so will punish schools that are doing "well."

If secondary schools accept the 40% , the year after it may well be 50% , the following year 60% etc. Why must we ape the failed English system constantly ? I know a number of teachers in England and they have teaching assistants who take over the class to allow the teachers time for the crazy amount of paperwork they have to do. Seeing as we can't even fund meaningful SNA provision, we won't be getting TAs any time soon.

Fair play to the secondary teachers for standing up for their pupils and themselves.

Exactly !!! 40/50/60 they don't care . It's only a number to them . Once it's in its in.
The only number we should accept and the only number the union should come back to us is ZERO!!!!!
We are moving towards a system that failed in the UK and they are moving away from it. Daft