The dumbed-down Leaving Cert

_Dara_

jonnycivic wrote: »

They changed how they grade it nothing else so they didnt "Dumb down" the leaving cert its the same standard it was.

I did my LC in 2001. I had a booklet with the Honours Maths papers stretching back to the late 80s. The papers from the the late 80s to around the early 90s were much, much harder than the ones that came in the years before my LC (say 1999 onwards). It was much less obvious what was wanted from the student in the early exam papers. Much more problem solving was required. I saw an Honours LC maths paper a few years ago, maybe 2013 and this paper was much easier than my 2001 Honours Maths paper. So another level of dumbing down has been reached.

I'm afraid dumbing down is very much happening. And it's doing students no favours. My Honours Maths really stood to me in college. I can't say that would happen now.

Wanderer78

Dreadful system, truly is a one size fits all, and does a dreadful job, even exasperates complex problems such as mental health issues, complex learning disabilities, complex behavioural problems etc etc. As a psychologist who has worked within our educational system for many years told me, our schools are educational factories. I class our system as an example of a 'hyper-competitive' system, and if you 're not of that psychological profile, you may struggle.

Education is not a competition, it's an extremely important stage in one's life. A large proportion of the syllabus should be dumped and replaced with far more important life skills training. Homework should be dumped to. I could go and on, but it's unlikely any of it will change soon.

I wish those receiving their results today the best, and don't become disheartened if your goals were not achieved this time around, there's always other options in life, and remember, our educational system does fail some very badly at times. Best of luck

I honestly don't understand the media/ its adult readership's preoccupation with the leaving cert. It isn't particularly healthy.

The use of bell-curves by the State Examinations Commission diminishes the fears of grade inflation, which by the way, isn't simply proven by observing slight increases in the numbers of individuals passing an exam.

Anyone who knows a leaving cert student knows that there is an ever-increasing compendium of apps, and web resources, and grade-seeking strategies available to students, and I am not surprised that students are performing better than in previous years as a direct result of the increased resources.

But going back to the bell-curve, you're still only giving an A1 (or whatever they call it now) to the top 8-12% of students in subjects like Maths and English, so I dont see a real problem.

Maybe that figure was 4-5% in previous years, I dont know. Why does it matter? The only purpose that debate serves seems to be to assuage the egos of those who missed the top grades back then. The leaving cert isn't designed to be an intergenerational comparator of cognitive intelligence.

The whole point is to filter students into different percentiles in terms of academic attainment. Whether we give the best grade to the top 5% or the top 10% of students probably doesn't matter very much. Those students will still be well placed to commence further study in that particular field.

Again, I must repeat i find the media hand-wringing/ unhealthy preoccupation with the leaving cert to be entirely puzzling.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Kaiser_

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Dreadful system, truly is a one size fits all, and does a dreadful job, even exasperates complex problems such as mental health issues, complex learning disabilities, complex behavioural problems etc etc. As a psychologist who has worked within our educational system for many years told me, our schools are educational factories. I class our system as an example of a 'hyper-competitive' system, and if you 're not of that psychological profile, you may struggle.

Education is not a competition, it's an extremely important stage in one's life. A large proportion of the syllabus should be dumped and replaced with far more important life skills training. Homework should be dumped to. I could go and on, but it's unlikely any of it will change soon.

I wish those receiving their results today the best, and don't become disheartened if your goals were not achieved this time around, there's always other options in life, and remember, our educational system does fail some very badly at times. Best of luck

To be fair, I can see the "emotional" value in this post and on that front it certainly has merit.

But the real world is a competitive and often harsh place and shielding or making excuses for people who don't make the grade - or in this case, lowering the grade so they can - is not doing them any favours in the long run.

And while I agree that there are indeed those who struggle because of learning difficulties, at the same time I wonder is this explanation being reached for too quickly these days.

AdamD

I'd rather see more people attempt higher level maths than drop down to ordinary for fear of failure. Isn't that more positive for the education system? Students attempting to learn more. Focusing on the points outcome rather than the education outcome is silly.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wanderer78

_Kaiser_ wrote:

But the real world is a competitive and often harsh place and shielding or making excuses for people who don't make the grade - or in this case, lowering the grade so they can - is not doing them any favours in the long run.

There's a difference between competitiveness and hyper-competitiveness. Hyper-competitiveness creates and encourages aggressive behavioural traits which are actually highly destructive for society as a whole, I truly do believe our educational system is an example of such a system. Many kids are actually unhappy in our educational system, why so, and why do we continue with it? Many kids are leaving our educational system lacking in critical life skills, who's fault is this and why are we continually allowing this?

silverharp

Turtwig wrote: »

Pretty much this.

Society adorns "success". Most parents want their children to be winners and great at everything. Social media amplifies this effect. The virtues of experiencing failure and handling, it are completely ignored. Somewhat ironic too because social media achievement boasting is essentially one exponentially large self replicating loop of "survivorship bias".

I mentioned it above but as a parent it would terrify me if my kids were under taught in school and under examined only to fall flat on their face in University. Also points inflation is just the same as standing up at a soccer match you have the same view as if everyone stayed seated.

BillyBobBS

Our education system is a complete mess and tbh i think it is in part hugely responsible for the mess in our health care system.

languagenerd

I think the idea of making 30% count as a pass at HL is because most universities and ITs have basic entry requirements - something like "a pass at OL in a minimum of 5 subjects including a language and maths".

This is separate to points: you could get 350 and still not get offered a place on a course with a 325 minimum, because you failed HL maths or French (even if the course had nothing to do with that subject). If 40% at Ordinary Level is enough to tick that box, why shouldn't 35% at Higher Level, which is much harder to get?

Should a 30-39% mark at HL be worth points in itself though? I'm not sure I agree with that. Certainly not a number like 37 points anyway. But I do think it's ok to accept it in situations where 40% at OL would be sufficient.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Redhighking

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I appreciate your Driving Test analogy and I would agree that such a change would make the test easier with the reduced penalty for mounting the curb.

Under the revised LC points system students will be receiving points for results that previously would have resulted in zero points but nevertheless they are still scoring lowly in the exam (30-39%), they are not actually performing any better due to a suggested dumbed down LC. They are just being awarded points where historically none would have been awarded.

As mentioned by 'A Tyrant Named Miltiades!' above, the percentage of higher grades been scored by students is still relatively consistent with previous years. If the leaving cert is being dumbed as suggested why isnt this being translated into more students achieving higher grades.

The changing of the points system will grant lower scoring students more points this year but it is been reported that this will just translate in lower points requiring courses in the CAO increasing by 10 to 15 points - effectively removing this points advantage.

namloc1980

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's like a participation medal. Poor message for young people.

Wanderer78

BillyBobBS wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

both problems are actually complexly interlinked

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

why have we a points system at all? again, education isnt a competition! its truly an extremely important part of the development of an individual, do a bad job of that, and you ll probably have much bigger problems down the road.

heres an example of what happens when you fail to address issues, particularly complex issues in kids, watch very closely now......

jem

I'm parent who's second child has just received his leaving cert and did extremely well (got well more points than he needed ( we think)) . Therefore it is a long time since I sat the leaving cert (1986) I think the pressure on kids is far higher than in my day.
Also the idea that even if you get enough points for a course but fail one (maths) then you fail you leaving is IMHo mad. and has caused many to take pass papers getting A1 or O1 as it's called now, I think, where they would have been well able for honors but afraid to take the chance
The fact that in uni if you fail a subject you can repeat a few months later makes sense but with the leaving you have to wait a whole year makes no sense.
many kids freeze on the day and don't do their best at all makes it very hard on all kids.
Personally I would split the leaving into two, end of 5th year and 6th year . with the 6th year one being done at easter with the chance to repeat exam in June.
Or allow the extra maths exam that UL has for science courses to be available for all courses.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Kimbot

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Then could you not say that intelligence amongst the nation has improved in those years?

Redhighking

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The increase in As an Bs has actually been reported as a result of the dramatic overhaul of the LC marking schemes across all subjects, I will try to find this source. Still not seeing how your connection between the new points system dumbing down the 2017 LC.

Again not too sure how Trinity awarding more 1.1s in recent times is relevant to the LC now being dumbed down. I would imagine there is a correlation between to increased awarding of 1.1s with Trinity having dropped out of the top 50 global Universities.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

red ears

If you look at the results on the Irish times website a lot of them are worse than 2016.

TheDoc

While it is indeed dumbed down, there is already fundamental questions over the validity of the style of learning we incorporate in secondary schools. And then even in third level there is general enough debate.

I'm a pretty big believer that education while there is the obvious tangible learning (maths, read, write, communicate) the entire process is really showing an ability to complete various tasks and stick to something to completion. I've worked with people with top degrees from Trinity (when it was regarded as a high valued thing to have) who were utterly useless and atrocious, and worked with people that went through Tech colleges who were brilliant.

Once you leave college and enter the work environment, I believe that is where real learning happens. Some companies will have you forcefully forget what you learned and adopt their styles or practice. Especially noticable in IT.

When I think of even my third level degree, all I can think what I took from it that is applicable in my working life thus far, has been the understanding of system lifecycles and business process re-engineering, in how to look at a process, break it down and rebuild it.

Especially in the IT sector, if you do get into a total IT company, they are likely going to want to train you and shape you into their own methods and practice.

I think as always, while this might be "easier" in a sense of grading, secondary school is a filter to separate those able for further education and those who need to finish up school and go do whatever. And third level education is another filter.

Whats interesting is the "dumb" down of the leaving cert, yet, in my sector anyway, the rapid rise of requirements and barriers to entry. All of a sudden in many places a level 8 degree isn't enough, its now a masters. And where it was a masters now its phds. Really weird. Read some white papers where there is foresight and recommendations of getting qualifications and degree on a 5-8 year cycle to keep relevant and career progression. Personally I knew what I wanted to do from second year, burst through school and through college and striaght into work ,and now experienced in my field, still cringe at the prospect or suggestion from colleagues or management about "courses" and stuff. I really don't want to ever go near an exam again

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wanderer78

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

so what should we do with these people that struggle within our academic system? why is our academic system so biased towards academia? why not introduce alternatives to the world of academia at the early stages of our educational system?

fergiesfolly

Any system that asks 16/17 year old to ram two years of learning into two weeks of exams isn't working anyway, so whether they're dumbing it down, streamlining it, or whatever, I dont care as long as the kids get a chance to do the course they want.
LC needs major overhaul but won't get it, so its all a con anyway. Good luck if the kids get a break.

Falthyron

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You don't know that. The points system has been revamped. Nobody will know until Friday. 222 CAO points in the new system could be worth 100 points in the previous system.

pickarooney

It's a good start but we need to start bringing in scholarships for illiterate kids who can play sports.

mariaalice

The essential point though is: Has graduating from university become "easier" if for example you looked at a student graduating from Trinity with a civil engineering degree( a very maths heavy course) would a student form the 1970s have had to complete a higher level of work than one from today?, would the student from the 1970s be better educated than today students? I would hazard a guess that it is still a course requiring a lot of work therefore if the leaving cert is so terrible how are the student actuley able to do the course work?.

At the end of the day the leaving cert is mostly jut a gateway to third level.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

OldNotWIse

mariaalice wrote: »

The essential point though is: Has graduating from university become "easier" if for example you looked at a student graduating from Trinity with a civil engineering degree( a very maths heavy course) would a student form the 1970s have had to complete a higher level of work than one from today?, would the student from the 1970s be better educated than today students? I would hazard a guess that it is still a course requiring a lot of work therefore if the leaving cert is so terrible how are the student actuley able to do the course work?.

At the end of the day the leaving cert is motley jut a gateway to third level.

And the points are a reflection of the demand for the course, not the level of difficulty attaching to it. I got 500 points and my course was 380 or something so I thought it'd be a breeze. It was really tough and I had to work hard to come out the other side!