Afraid to Fail - Why are we getting rid of exam grades?

Dughorm

So on the education section of the Irish times there are two articles next to each other featuring at the moment:

1. A new move to let students who score 20% in exams "pass" and

2. 1 in 6 teenagers low performers at maths

I don't think it's a coincidence. Standards are dropping, courses are being made easier (see Project Maths) and all that's being done about it is a move to cover up low standards by removing a grading system and replacing it with a fuzzy "partially achieved" approach.

Are we afraid to actually grade subjects so that students feel better about performing poorly in exams?

Would you be happy having a teacher who "partially achieved" teaching the course to you?

Should we be demanding higher standards, more resources and more transparency instead accepting that 1 in 6 teens can't do maths and creating a fudge to gloss over it?

StewartGriffin

Dughorm wrote: »

Would you be happy having a teacher who "partially achieved" teaching the course to you?

No. But it happens in every school in Ireland.

They want to lower the pass mark so that more students actually try higher level maths. As of right now if they try and fail that's their LC done for, so many don't take the risk. Its an attempt to increase the level of education students are getting, not reduce it.

Dughorm

AdamD wrote: »

Its an attempt to increase the level of education students are getting, not reduce it.

Comparing an honours level maths paper today with a ordinary level maths paper from 40 years ago would be quite an eyeopener.

It's the opposite of increasing the level of education!

There's no reason why the CAO can't change their points criteria to deal with E-grades without having to lower standards and fudge the scale to mask it, no?

Berserker

Well an increase in the number of students, sitting and passing higher level Mathematics, allows the powers that be to push the image that the RoI has a knowledge based economy. The removal of the grades would encourage more students to stick with the higher level course.

strelok

Dughorm wrote: »

Comparing an honours level maths paper today with a ordinary level maths paper from 40 years ago would be quite an eyeopener.

It's the opposite of increasing the level of education!

There's no reason why the CAO can't change their points criteria to deal with E-grades without having to lower standards and fudge the scale to mask it, no?

even when i was doing the leaving back in '01, I had a look at some of the papers my parents would have done and was shocked at the level of them compared to what I was doing, I can only imagine what it's like now. mid 70's equivalent of the junior cert is probably the level you'd get at a 2016 masters.

Red King

The whole education system is being dumbed down

Iwasfrozen

People politicize exam results and act shocked when politicians make exams easier. Here's an idea, next time little Timmy ails an exam little Timmy's parents could blame little Timmy instead of the school, the Principal the Teacher, the Taoiseach and anyone else in the firing line...

darkpagandeath

You are all special little flowers. Now come on stage and collect your 15 Th place first place meddle. And also collect your participation award followed by your team building award.

Dughorm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

People politicize exam results and act shocked when politicians make exams easier. Here's an idea, next time little Timmy ails an exam little Timmy's parents could blame little Timmy instead of the school, the Principal the Teacher, the Taoiseach and anyone else in the firing line...

You see I think it's the "blame" culture you describe is part of the problem.

Psychologists will say little Timmy is emotionally scared because he is a "failure" or "blamed" if he fails a subject. The point of the system is to make sure that when little Timmy becomes Dr. Timmy he can actually function in society and have a rounded education.

Instead of giving Timmy the education he deserves and checking to see has he acquired the necessary level of education, is the new plan that we'll make him feel better about not being educated properly? Handy cop out for teachers, government, parents and Timmy himself (if he is a lazy sod!)

Berserker

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

People politicize exam results and act shocked when politicians make exams easier. Here's an idea, next time little Timmy ails an exam little Timmy's parents could blame little Timmy instead of the school, the Principal the Teacher, the Taoiseach and anyone else in the firing line...

But, but, but, it's always our far right government's fault.

CelticRambler

... and don't forget your playschool graduation ceremony will be a week earlier this year ... :rolleyes:

moc moc a moc

darkpagandeath wrote: »

15 Th place first place meddle

See? Nothing wrong with our edumacation system...

AnonoBoy

Nothing wrong with initiatives to help people who genuinely have trouble with numeracy and literacy.

But making sh*t easier for the lazy f*cks who don't care enough to study? Ah f*ck 'em - they're the pr*cks who talk loudly on the bus and believe ever Facebook meme about the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide.

The Randy Riverbeast

In theory most students should be doing well in exams. The whole point of education is to teach with exams being based on the topics the students have learnt about. Papers probably look more difficult or easier depending on what topics you covered.

They could set the pass rate at handing up the paper for junior cert for all the difference it would make.

suicide_circus

Little Timmy needs a kick up the arse by the sounds of things

Iwasfrozen

Dughorm wrote: »

You see I think it's the "blame" culture you describe is part of the problem.

Psychologists will say little Timmy is emotionally scared because he is a "failure" or "blamed" if he fails a subject. The point of the system is to make sure that when little Timmy becomes Dr. Timmy he can actually function in society and have a rounded education.

Instead of giving Timmy the education he deserves and checking to see has he acquired the necessary level of education, is the new plan that we'll make him feel better about not being educated properly? Handy cop out for teachers, government, parents and Timmy himself (if he is a lazy sod!)

Well of course Timmy should be blamed if he fails a subject, it's his fault! Why is it that students in East and South East Asia continually show better results than European and North American children? Is it because they are racially more intelligent or because their culture places a greater emphasis on education? I would go with the latter an suggest we need to take education more seriously in this country. A good start would be to make Irish an optional subject to free up time for useful subjects.

Cool_CM

I love explaining to people from Germanic countries how you can manage to get more than half of an exam wrong and still pass.
You wouldn't be too happy if your contraception was 40% effective.

The_Valeyard

Cool_CM wrote: »

I love explaining to people from Germanic countries how you can manage to get more than half of an exam wrong and still pass.
You wouldn't be too happy if your contraception was 40% effective.

Latex condoms become 90% ineffective after 60 seconds of usage with oil based lube.:eek

chrissb8

People should want to learn these subjects. It should be teached throughout secondary school but only at a level where the math is applicable to real life. For those that have genuine interest it's there for them. I couldn't do a math paper now if I tried. So how is it relevant that they should be graded on something that has no use to them long term whatsoever. Also on another point the whole concept of timed exams are stupid especially at leaving cert. Why are these things timed anyway? I mean people are forever complaining about time constraints. Bit unfair if you know it and just need more time than others to think. Time shouldn't be the decider in a good grade or not anyway. To be honest the whole L.C is a crock of s**t just no one cares to really do too much after they're finished. Why isn't there a survey by students a few months after to see what they think? Oops sorry for the rant.

PARlance

Re Maths:
It was certainly flawed 15 years ago when I did my LC. Maths was my strong point but after a week at Higher Level in 5th year, I figured it wasn't worth the effort. I was called in by the principle, parents were called over my decision. Finally I convinced them all that it wasn't worth the hour of so effort required from me each night to get 70-80 points from HL when I could do nothing and get 60 in OL. Ordinary level LC being pretty much the same as Higher Level JC at the time in my view.

Apart from attending class, I didn't do any math work up until a month or so before the LC. Got my 60 points and benefited from using my time on other subjects over the 2 years.

I don't think the pass rate or mark is the main issue with it, it's the massive gulf between higher and ordinary levels. Unless a kid was sure they needed HL maths, I would say that doing it is a form of madness.

endacl

Education is important, but self esteem is importanter.

wexandproud

i think changing the system is all part of a bigger overall problem with a lot of parent . My little timmy is stressed , my timmy is not able to cope, my little timmy is tired and over worked . Well he has to toughen up , growing up and leading a normal life is full of stress , hassel and disappointment and people have to be taught that you cant keep avoiding it , you sometimes have to put up with it and learn to move on.
Parents are doing their kids no favours at all by making excuses for their kids when they dont give it their best shot . My middle lad discovered vodka at 15 and we had a terrible time with him skipping school not doing homework giving teachers a hard time , but did we blame the teachers or ask for exceptions , no , we knew our timmy was being a lazy ,troublesome ,rebellious little sh1te 200 points in his junior cert .There was ongoing war at home between us all but we kept at him . We could have made excuses and blamed everybody else but we stuck at it and he has turned around . if it had bee made easier for him to pass his exams it would have done no good at all , he qualified as a vet last year

Graces7

endacl wrote: »

Education is important, but self esteem is importanter.

Are the two mutually exclusive? No way surely. Maybe the real problem is that we are valuing educational " achievements " far far too much above personal skills. I taught some years way back when very few went on to further education because they were not ACADEMICALLY gifted. They had real gifts elsewhere. I was once asked to "talk sense " to a 14 year old who was intent on leaving school as soon as she legally could. ie immediately! I chatted with her and a more level headed and happy girl you never met. She had a job lined up at the stables she helped at. It was her heart's desire and she loved it. She had fair literacy skills etc. I knew a farmer here with 4 grown sons. All greatly over educated and doing course after course and never working and refusing to help him on the farm. In my day ( says granny!!!) a degree was solely an academic work. Deep study. Then there were eg teacher training colleges. I was an academic and gained a very high honours degree but I think four of my year even went to university. Todays degrees sound pretty meaningless but is this not the US system. OF COURSE employers will know the reality. But this dumbing down will not work as it will disadvantage the real achievers and discourage excellence;; oh just seen that my local hospital is being renamed; no longer Kerry General but University Hospital!

Graces7

wexandproud wrote: »

i think changing the system is all part of a bigger overall problem with a lot of parent . My little timmy is stressed , my timmy is not able to cope, my little timmy is tired and over worked . Well he has to toughen up , growing up and leading a normal life is full of stress , hassel and disappointment and people have to be taught that you cant keep avoiding it , you sometimes have to put up with it and learn to move on.
Parents are doing their kids no favours at all by making excuses for their kids when they dont give it their best shot . My middle lad discovered vodka at 15 and we had a terrible time with him skipping school not doing homework giving teachers a hard time , but did we blame the teachers or ask for exceptions , no , we knew our timmy was being a lazy ,troublesome ,rebellious little sh1te 200 points in his junior cert .There was ongoing war at home between us all but we kept at him . We could have made excuses and blamed everybody else but we stuck at it and he has turned around . if it had bee made easier for him to pass his exams it would have done no good at all , he qualified as a vet last year

Wonderful; thank you. My mother decades ago now, had to leave school at 14 to work in the Lancashire mills... She went to nightchool when they started the workers education scheme and did secretarial skills and got an excellent job a a secretary, Often the "late starters" do well as they are deeply motivated. and with really good strong parents like you!

evolving_doors

StewartGriffin wrote: »

No. But it happens in every school in Ireland.

We'll that escalated quickly... Post 1 about changing grades, post 2 blames teachers.

Horayyy teacher bashing season must be in full swing now.

kfallon

As a matter of interest, is there anywhere online you can go in and view past LC papers? Reading this thread has made me curious to have a look at the Maths paper I did in '96!

Cheese Wagstaff

kfallon wrote: »

As a matter of interest, is there anywhere online you can go in and view past LC papers? Reading this thread has made me curious to have a look at the Maths paper I did in '96!

www.examinations.ie

Has all papers over the last 15-20 years.

cowboyBuilder

20% being a pass mark ?

it's a joke right - even 40% is bad enough.

55-60 should be a pass ...

Graces7

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

20% being a pass mark ?

it's a joke right - even 40% is bad enough.

55-60 should be a pass ...

With us it was 45 %. Long long ago and the papers were hard.

Fallschirmjager

my favourite summary of the 'participation' society...AND its hit our schools already. Personally, we refuse to let our kids accept them. win or dont win..either way...deal with it...

anyways...here is adam corolla-- a rant of epic proportions...be advised...a lot of explicit language...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQpXybTnGVg

kfallon

Cheese Wagstaff wrote: »

www.examinations.ie

Has all papers over the last 15-20 years.

Just had a look at Higher Maths Paper 1, Jaysus I wouldn't have a clue about any of that stuff now, tis like Double Dutch!

noodler

I have no prblem with somebody getting 30/35 points for getting 30-39% in an Honours exam.

The whole "nil points below 40%" standard always seemed silly to me - a perverse incentive towards ordinary level exams.

wakka12

Dughorm wrote: »

So on the education section of the Irish times there are two articles next to each other featuring at the moment:

1. A new move to let students who score 20% in exams "pass" and

2. 1 in 6 teenagers low performers at maths

I don't think it's a coincidence. Standards are dropping, courses are being made easier (see Project Maths) and all that's being done about it is a move to cover up low standards by removing a grading system and replacing it with a fuzzy "partially achieved" approach.

Are we afraid to actually grade subjects so that students feel better about performing poorly in exams?

Would you be happy having a teacher who "partially achieved" teaching the course to you?

Should we be demanding higher standards, more resources and more transparency instead accepting that 1 in 6 teens can't do maths and creating a fudge to gloss over it?

Are they? I constantly hear middle aged people say this but Im almost sure its not true, teenagers of today study longer hours than they ever did. Unless you have some information to back up your statement

All I can say is thank good I am not in school any more, I have an exam in a few weeks I haven't done an exam in a very long time and I am finding studying difficult there are so many distraction in today society.

A though for all you that are giving out about education system.

There was a research scientist replying to a thread about cures for cancer, now that person is probably young maybe under 35/40 and a lot of there team would be the same so how come they have the ability to undertake cutting edge research if they are the products of of such a terrible education systme?

PowerToWait

wakka12 wrote: »

teenagers of today study longer hours than they ever did. Unless you have some information to back up your statement

I'm almost certain that in the majority of cases this is not true. Unless you have statistics to prove it?

Pick a subject you were/are good at in school. Look up last year's LC paper. Then look up a paper from the 90s.

There's a huge difference in level of difficulty.

Lu Tze

wakka12 wrote: »

Are they? I constantly hear middle aged people say this but Im almost sure its not true, teenagers of today study longer hours than they ever did. Unless you have some information to back up your statement

There were constant changes to the curriculum down through the years, not just recently. Did the leaving cert in 2002 (I think), and looking at my brothers physics and chemistry books and papers (5 years previous) there was large sections dropped, seemed to be the reasoning and logic based elements (most of the electrical section in physics for instance) replaced by stuff suited to learning by rote or memorising (without necessarily understanding).

Great if you have a good memory, not so great if you have an aptitude for the subject but not so good a memory.

Don't know if it holds true for non science/maths subjects.

PowerToWait

mariaalice wrote: »

There was a research scientist replying to a thread about cures for cancer, now that person is probably young maybe under 35/40 and a lot of there team would be the same so how come they have the ability to undertake cutting edge research if they are the products of of such a terrible education systme?

If they're 40 then it's not applicable. And people curing cancer are doubtless unfathomably brilliant, self motivating high achievers.

Lu Tze

Lu Tze wrote: »

There were constant changes to the curriculum down through the years, not just recently. Did the leaving cert in 2002 (I think), and looking at my brothers physics and chemistry books and papers (5 years previous) there was large sections dropped, seemed to be the reasoning and logic based elements (most of the electrical section in physics for instance) replaced by stuff suited to learning by rote or memorising (without necessarily understanding).

Great if you have a good memory, not so great if you have an aptitude for the subject but not so good a memory.

Don't know if it holds true for non science/maths subjects.

So does that mean all the engineers, scientists ect who are entering the world of college/work/ research wont be able to produce to the same level as in the past because of the education they have received, because that would be the logical conclusion to what you are saying.

PowerToWait

PowerToWait wrote: »

If they're 40 then it's not applicable. And people curing cancer are doubtless unfathomably brilliant, self motivating high achievers.

They still have to be educated, do their leaving cert/A levels based on the curriculum that's in front of them.

Fleawuss

Back in my day we all finished primary with the equivalent of a modern masters. Those who did seventh class (yes it's true) are the equivalent of PhD's now. Anyhow we all got on the boat to England barefoot not knowing our arse from our elbows and built the motorways and the huge housing estates. All the time we drank ourselves silly every weekend and invented riverdance in Kilburn.

Some of the lads who specialised in oral fecundity moved in to take over the meeja and we all fathered hundreds of children (well most of us ). The sun was shining constantly and there was no rain. We didn't take any **** from anyone and why would we with a MA from Bally****zu NS.

No one nowadays knows anything. We invented the computer when one of the lads attached a typewriter to a singing kettle. Things went to pot shortly afterwards. Did I ever tell ye about the time...

gutenberg

Lu Tze wrote: »

There were constant changes to the curriculum down through the years, not just recently. Did the leaving cert in 2002 (I think), and looking at my brothers physics and chemistry books and papers (5 years previous) there was large sections dropped, seemed to be the reasoning and logic based elements (most of the electrical section in physics for instance) replaced by stuff suited to learning by rote or memorising (without necessarily understanding).

Great if you have a good memory, not so great if you have an aptitude for the subject but not so good a memory.

Don't know if it holds true for non science/maths subjects.

I know that when the history curriculum changed (new syllabus was first examined in 2006), the shift was heavily away from rote learning & towards analysis/argument. The old history curriculum basically required you to learn everything about a given topic, and then regurgitate it in the exam. The new paper asks people to analyse previously-unseen documents, and the questions in the essay sections have a more argumentative slant to them.

I remember it well because there was some degree of shock when people got their LC grades back - many people had done poorly in history because their teachers still taught them in the 'old' method, which isn't what is being examined any more.

Don't know much about any other subjects, just thought I'd chip that in.

Antar Bolaeisk

gutenberg wrote: »

I know that when the history curriculum changed (new syllabus was first examined in 2006), the shift was heavily away from rote learning & towards analysis/argument. The old history curriculum basically required you to learn everything about a given topic, and then regurgitate it in the exam. The new paper asks people to analyse previously-unseen documents, and the questions in the essay sections have a more argumentative slant to them.

I remember it well because there was some degree of shock when people got their LC grades back - many people had done poorly in history because their teachers still taught them in the 'old' method, which isn't what is being examined any more.

Don't know much about any other subjects, just thought I'd chip that in.

That one absolutely needed to be changed, I was one of the last people to do the old one and it was more of an endurance test than an exam.

I probably lost points because I'm fairly sure my handwriting was completely illegible by the end of it.

If I recall correctly Higher Level History in the leaving cert was also one of the longest exams I had to sit.

gutenberg

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

That one absolutely needed to be changed, I was one of the last people to do the old one and it was more of an endurance test than an exam.

I probably lost points because I'm fairly sure my handwriting was completely illegible by the end of it.

If I recall correctly Higher Level History in the leaving cert was also one of the longest exams I had to sit.

Totally agree. It's still a long exam with a lot of writing (nearly 3 hours), but compared with the older exam I think it's a big improvement.

topper75

suicide_circus wrote: »

Little Timmy needs a kick up the arse by the sounds of things

Aye. But no 20-meter run up.

That is "child abuse".

take everything

Monetary inflation.
Grades inflation.
Ego inflation (narcissism/Facebook etc).
Women's sexuality (porn etc).

Not anything new really. Very fitting with the age. Cheapening/commodifying of everything.

Knex*

We're going to end up producing overconfident, dumb people. People who grow up believing that they are great at a subject, when in fact they could be average at best.

In fact, we already have an issue with this, when you have people trying to actually apply their supposed knowledge, when the reality is that it was simply rote learning, and not actually an understanding of the subject. I noticed this both with myself and others, especially in college.

We're just exacerbating the problem, not helping it.

I'm all for changing the paradigms of education, moving from rote learning scenarios to more practical application of knowledge and understanding, but simply dumbing down the standard examination process is not the change we need.

JuliusCaesar

Dughorm wrote: »

Comparing an honours level maths paper today with a ordinary level maths paper from 40 years ago would be quite an eyeopener.

It's the opposite of increasing the level of education!

Go on, show us. It must have been about then that I did it. Would love to see!

0byme75341jo28

PowerToWait wrote: »

I'm almost certain that in the majority of cases this is not true. Unless you have statistics to prove it?

Pick a subject you were/are good at in school. Look up last year's LC paper. Then look up a paper from the 90s.

There's a huge difference in level of difficulty.

This is simply not true.

If you want to gauge the difficulty look at the marking schemes.

wexandproud

Graces7 wrote: »

Are the two mutually exclusive? No way surely. Maybe the real problem is that we are valuing educational " achievements " far far too much above personal skills. I taught some years way back when very few went on to further education because they were not ACADEMICALLY gifted. They had real gifts elsewhere. I was once asked to "talk sense " to a 14 year old who was intent on leaving school as soon as she legally could. ie immediately! I chatted with her and a more level headed and happy girl you never met. She had a job lined up at the stables she helped at. It was her heart's desire and she loved it. She had fair literacy skills etc. I knew a farmer here with 4 grown sons. All greatly over educated and doing course after course and never working and refusing to help him on the farm. In my day ( says granny!!!) a degree was solely an academic work. Deep study. Then there were eg teacher training colleges. I was an academic and gained a very high honours degree but I think four of my year even went to university. Todays degrees sound pretty meaningless but is this not the US system. OF COURSE employers will know the reality. But this dumbing down will not work as it will disadvantage the real achievers and discourage excellence;; oh just seen that my local hospital is being renamed; no longer Kerry General but University Hospital!

i would be the first to say that education is important if little timmy is willing to work at it and be happy , we just knew that our lad had ambition but he just went off track a bit..However education is not the be all and end all either. .IF TOMMY [timmy's brother] has no interest in school and only gets poor exam results but is happy enough to work away at something and make a good honest living ,well in my opinion thats ok too .Nothing wrong with good honest grafting
Changing the system to suit lazy timmy or my' spoiled little pup with issues timmy ' , would have a huge knock on effect down the line with people shouting about their kid's 'right to go to collage even though they have neither the ability or the interest to knuckle down and do it
some of ireland's collages are held in very high esteem and i think it would have terrible consequences down the line if we start changing the system to suit people who can't hack it

by the way ; if timmy or tommy are reading , it's nothing personal

wexandproud

Cool_CM wrote: »

I love explaining to people from Germanic countries how you can manage to get more than half of an exam wrong and still pass.
You wouldn't be too happy if your contraception was 40% effective.

or if your doctor got it rigrt 40% of the time or the mechanic putting your car together or the pilot flying ya off on the holliers