LC Geography... very slow

OMGeary

So it's Christmas of 6th year and we only have physical and like 3/4 of regional done. We went out and did our GI but haven't written it up yet. How far behind are we, and how much has everyone else covered ?

phoebo

OMGeary wrote: »

So it's Christmas of 6th year and we only have physical and like 3/4 of regional done. We went out and did our GI but haven't written it up yet. How far behind are we, and how much has everyone else covered ?

How many exam questions is that? Just curious as I'm in 5th year and we have 22 exam Qs done

OMGeary

phoebo wrote: »

How many exam questions is that? Just curious as I'm in 5th year and we have 22 exam Qs done

To be honest you've probably done more exam questions than us. We get no homework and hardly any tests. When we do get tests we are told to learn off one answer from the exam skills book.

DublinArnie

To be honest your teacher doesn't sound like the best.

I'm in fifth year, and have most of regional geography done.

spurious

Measuring a syllabus by exam questions is an extraordinary approach for any teacher to take.

phoebo

spurious wrote: »

Measuring a syllabus by exam questions is an extraordinary approach for any teacher to take.

I know, its very different to how my other classes are but it seems it work! We still read the book but when we take notes we organise them under the headings of different exam questions that could be asked

DublinArnie

phoebo wrote: »

I know, its very different to how my other classes are but it seems it work! We still read the book but when we take notes we organise them under the headings of different exam questions that could be asked

Very smart, and entirely exam focused like all subjects should be!

My science teacher does something similar...:D

spurious

DublinArnie wrote: »

Very smart, and entirely exam focused like all subjects should be!

My science teacher does something similar...:D

For training to pass an exam maybe, but not for teaching a subject.

EoghanIRL

spurious wrote: »

For training to pass an exam maybe, but not for teaching a subject.

I know people who didn't have text books but the teacher game them the marking schemes instead and they learned from them.
The problem is you can pass an exam but still not understand the material.

DublinArnie

spurious wrote: »

For training to pass an exam maybe, but not for teaching a subject.

All of the material we learn is basically centered around the marking scheme. He'd write up a definition, and underline the words required by the marking scene etc.

This applies to everything including experiments. Instead of learning from the book and irrelevant information.

EoghanIRL

DublinArnie wrote: »

All of the material we learn is basically centered around the marking scheme. He'd write up a definition, and underline the words required by the marking scene etc.

This applies to everything including experiments. Instead of learning from the book and irrelevant information.

That technique really comes in handy in college when you have to apply your knowledge

Seriously though the technique is flawed ,if they through you a curve ball or any new question type then you could be in trouble
Lc- wrote learning > understanding

phoebo

EoghanIRL wrote: »

That technique really comes in handy in college when you have to apply your knowledge

Seriously though the technique is flawed ,if they through you a curve ball or any new question type then you could be in trouble
Lc- wrote learning > understanding

Yeah it depends on the teacher really. Mine, she explains things extremely well and we go through recent geographical events and we have to explain why we think they happened. I don't have any need to rote learn as we talk so much in class it just sinks in itself!

DublinArnie

EoghanIRL wrote: »

That technique really comes in handy in college when you have to apply your knowledge

Seriously though the technique is flawed ,if they through you a curve ball or any new question type then you could be in trouble
Lc- wrote learning > understanding

Well, I understand all my material. He doesn't just give us something and tell us to learn if we want marks.

Everything is explained don't think any drastic curve balls have being thrown in biology/physchem in the last decade???

spurious

EoghanIRL wrote: »

The problem is you can pass an exam but still not understand the material.

Exactly, which is what the universities keep giving out about - in many cases, justifiably so.

byrneg28

spurious wrote: »

Exactly, which is what the universities keep giving out about - in many cases, justifiably so.

University changed my life and if I could go back and repeat the Leaving Certificate i'd be confident of getting 550 plus. I got 380 in my Leaving Certificate because of rote-learning, it wasn't how I was comfortable learning

I got a First in my degree though, it's madness?

I remember learning for Geography exam going word-by-word
e.g. 'Hard-rock-takes-longer-to-erode-than-soft-rock-' when in reality, it's a very simple concept to understand..

It's a shame really..

byrneg28

OMGeary wrote: »

So it's Christmas of 6th year and we only have physical and like 3/4 of regional done. We went out and did our GI but haven't written it up yet. How far behind are we, and how much has everyone else covered ?

If you're worried about how slow the class is going, when you go home and study just learn the stuff yourself when practicing exam questions.

Most of the concepts are easy to understand and they're is a million instructional/interactive videos on youtube e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ATlTWjy5zs (take advantage of your remote learning - if you take a bus to school, make a playlist of videos that apply to your syllabus and just watch them on the bus)

Because we use a textbook in school because edco/folens want you to buy one. A person underestimates the vast amount of educational resources that are available on the web, even typing 'Mezzorgiorno' into wikipedia, could give you an abundance of knowledge

EoghanIRL

byrneg28 wrote: »

University changed my life and if I could go back and repeat the Leaving Certificate i'd be confident of getting 550 plus. I got 380 in my Leaving Certificate because of rote-learning, it wasn't how I was comfortable learning

I got a First in my degree though, it's madness?

I remember learning for Geography exam going word-by-word
e.g. 'Hard-rock-takes-longer-to-erode-than-soft-rock-' when in reality, it's a very simple concept to understand..

It's a shame really..

That not too uncommon . Many people who don't get the greatest leaving cert results thrive in college . College has so much self directed learning and understanding . I mean lecturers just read off the slides most of the time and then leave .

I guess in college you get to study stuff you like aswell or have an interest in which really helps .

It's also a common misconception that they start from the start in college . Definitely not the case they presume you understand all the lc material . I see why colleges give out now about the standard of lc teaching .

Butterfly182

EoghanIRL wrote: »

That not too uncommon . Many people who don't get the greatest leaving cert results thrive in college . College has so much self directed learning and understanding . I mean lecturers just read off the slides most of the time and then leave .

I guess in college you get to study stuff you like aswell or have an interest in which really helps .

It's also a common misconception that they start from the start in college . Definitely not the case they presume you understand all the lc material . I see why colleges give out now about the standard of lc teaching .

I would agree with this, some of my friends didn't do so well in the leaving cert (in terms of crude number of points) and went on to do extremely well at college too. However, many people who did really fantastic leaving certs do very well at college too, it is just a different style of learning to adapt to. You still have to learn of lots of things at college too for exams, just a more critical approach is taken. I got 500 points in my leaving cert, it took a little while for me to adjust to the new approach but after the first term I started to improve and came in the top 21 in my year in Geography (300 students).

I'm aware this is slightly off topic, the whole thread kind of has, but it is also true that many college courses don't start from scratch e.g. for history we were told you did not have to take history at leaving cert level to study it at college because it would all be explained anyway. It wasn't and those who didn't study leaving cert history struggled especially in the areas of modern Ireland. For Geography at college physical geography moved extremely quickly and used jargon terms from the beginning, a lot of reading was needed to keep on top of it.

I was taught by Geography at Leaving cert level by someone who used basically the definition of route learning. We never saw pictures of anything, we spend most classes taking down A1 Geography answers, and we never really engaged in any discussion of the material, just learnt it all off. We all got really good results, (I got an A2) but if I had not taken Geography at college, I would have an entirely wrong approach about what geography is and how it applies to the real world.

I agree with another poster's suggestions about utilizing the internet for resources but be careful about the sites which you use. Wiki is good for a base understanding but don't take points from it to put into your answers as it is an a site without much external moderation, thus the material is not always correct. Youtube has some fantastic videos especially for physical geography, try Geocast on Youtube, it's run by one of the physical geography lecturers at UCC.

if832uspx4eogt

I don't understand why we have to do Paris and Italy when they never ask for a "peripheral" region specifically, just a European region.

DublinArnie

Johnny Mammoth Cheesecake wrote: »

I don't understand why we have to do Paris and Italy when they never ask for a "peripheral" region specifically, just a European region.

They don't? My teacher always told us what there's nothing stopping them from saying "European core/preipheral" region so best be prepared for that one exam they do. They're the same as the BMW and GDA anyway. Same reasons, same factors, same results. Just different numbers and different names for organisations, funds etc.

thelad95

Johnny Mammoth Cheesecake wrote: »

I don't understand why we have to do Paris and Italy when they never ask for a "peripheral" region specifically, just a European region.

Yes but they could. Most people just do three regions though. One Irish, one european and one sub-continental. Our teacher as good as told us to drop one irish and one european. It's a calculated risk.

spurious

It's certainly a risk in an era where many are critical of the SEC and 'predictable' exams.

thelad95

spurious wrote: »

It's certainly a risk in an era where many are critical of the SEC and 'predictable' exams.

I did the Leaving Cert twice over the last two years and heard this bandied about constantly and to be honest, most papers were still fairly predictable with the exception of 2013 Economics which was a widely criticised paper.

Papers will largely continue to be predictable when the scope of information they can examine is as narrow as it is.

EoghanIRL

It's the same in college though . I mean the modules are very limited . For our final module exams they even took up our exam papers with the questions and they never put the mcqs onto the exam paper database.

I wonder would that be feasible in the lc . No marking schemes and take up the papers after the exams . Say if they introduced a new type of lc and did this .
Just thinking out loud.

thelad95

EoghanIRL wrote: »

It's the same in college though . I mean the modules are very limited . For our final module exams they even took up our exam papers with the questions and they never put the mcqs onto the exam paper database.

I wonder would that be feasible in the lc . No marking schemes and take up the papers after the exams . Say if they introduced a new type of lc and did this .
Just thinking out loud.

Given the evidence of the craftiness of LC students and teachers over the years in regard to mocks, it's inevitable there would be leaks. You would then have grind schools selling marking schemes for a fortune.

spurious

Theoretically, they could give exactly the same exam in many subjects as last year. That would throw the cat among the pigeons. So many people ignore things because 'that came up last year'.

EoghanIRL

thelad95 wrote: »

Given the evidence of the craftiness of LC students and teachers over the years in regard to mocks, it's inevitable there would be leaks. You would then have grind schools selling marking schemes for a fortune.

Yeah I didn't think of it like that . The way they do it though is that you write your exam number , student number and seat number on the exam paper . Examiner takes it up . If corrector doesn't see that the exam paper has been returned then zero marks awarded. I doubt that type of system will be implemented however .

spurious

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Yeah I didn't think of it like that . The way they do it though is that you write your exam number , student number and seat number on the exam paper . Examiner takes it up . If corrector doesn't see that the exam paper has been returned then zero marks awarded. I doubt that type of system will be implemented however .

Changing the setters/drafters annually (or at least more often) would make a substantial difference.

yoyojc

OMGeary wrote: »

So it's Christmas of 6th year and we only have physical and like 3/4 of regional done. We went out and did our GI but haven't written it up yet. How far behind are we, and how much has everyone else covered ?

Well we have done all of physical, regional, our write up completed and are doing our elective and I don't think we have gone at a fast pace at all? Get exam skills by sue Honan and learn answers yourself that's what I did anyway

etherealfairy

We've done Core, Régional, most of our élective and project write up.