And the Winner of 'The Most Positive Headline of the Day" goes to....

evolving_doors

The Irish Times


more-than-3-700-leaving-cert-pupils-fail-maths-exam

For the day that's in it, you'd think they'd stop the frenzy for just once.

Tom Dunne

evolving_doors wrote: »

The Irish Times


more-than-3-700-leaving-cert-pupils-fail-maths-exam

For the day that's in it, you'd think they'd stop the frenzy for just once.

I have to be honest, I was utterly appalled at that article. Talk about insensitive.

spurious

Anything to get a dig at teachers, even if it upsets teenagers.

killbillvol2

Actually the article is generally positive. It's just an idiotic headline.

Postgrad10

Imagine kids would have saw that before getting their results. As if they weren't stressed enough.

Tom Dunne

killbillvol2 wrote: »

Actually the article is generally positive. It's just an idiotic headline.

Ahem, yes, fair point.

But still, I would expect more from the IT. I thought I was reading the Independent there for a moment.

Postgrad10

It was probably a click bait heading anyway and it is true.

spurious

I can't remember a year that there was not at least one scary headline from the point of view of the students.

evolving_doors

Postgrad10 wrote: »

It was probably a click bait heading anyway and it is true.

Does the statistic really deviate from anything in previous years?

byhookorbycrook

Seeing as results must conform to a bell curve, do any of these stats mean much anyhow?

The J Stands for Jay

Postgrad10 wrote: »

Imagine kids would have saw that before getting their results. As if they weren't stressed enough.

I remember being very annoyed on results day that the papers had details of the results before we did (didn't help that the principal didn't want to give the to us till 4 o'clock...).

Reati

I must be missing something. The heading is a fact unless the number is not true? Are the details within not true either?

Do teenagers read and worry themselves with the ramblings of the IT?

evolving_doors

Reati wrote: »

I must be missing something. The heading is a fact unless the number is not true? Are the details within not true either?

Do teenagers read and worry themselves with the ramblings of the IT?

It's a fact that people fail maths every year. It's one of the 3 core subjects so students have to do the subject whether they like it or not.
What is 'NEW' about this news? RTE just reported that the results are pretty much the same as last year.
Why lead with this headline?

I doubt students would be buying the IT, but their parents might, it could also easily come up in a news feed if the Leaving Cert is on their search list.
But yes I'd agree it's unlikely, but I think it's still in poor taste as the leading headline.

mirrorwall14

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Seeing as results must conform to a bell curve, do any of these stats mean much anyhow?

Actually having looked at the biology doubling of H1 grades in horror to over 10% (I'm in Music trying to persuade people to take it with a H1 grade rate of 3.2%) I put all the stats into a google sheets for this year. They are not all bell curves at all. Music stayed almost exactly the same as this year in bell curve style like the arts subjects, biology now matches the other sciences. Chemistry is a similar shape, as is physics this year

The worst H1 rates in the subjects on offer in my school were all in construction, english, art, music, home ec and geography with under 4% of candidates. The best were Biology, chemistry, physics all at or above 10.8% (physics).

Its hard enough to get students to take arts subjects without parents and students saying but the H1 rate is so low, I can't take a chance. So we lose all our best students at LC. Can't blame them, its a points race. If they are three times more likely to get a H1 in Biology than Music then its a rare student that will stick with music

If anyone wants access to the chart generating google sheet pop me a mail.

chocoholic999

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Seeing as results must conform to a bell curve, do any of these stats mean much anyhow?

Actually having looked at the biology doubling of H1 grades in horror to over 10% (I'm in Music trying to persuade people to take it with a H1 grade rate of 3.2%) I put all the stats into a google sheets for this year. They are not all bell curves at all. Music stayed almost exactly the same as this year in bell curve style like the arts subjects, biology now matches the other sciences. Chemistry is a similar shape, as is physics this year

The worst H1 rates in the subjects on offer in my school were all in construction, english, art, music, home ec and geography with under 4% of candidates. The best were Biology, chemistry, physics all at or above 10.8% (physics).

Its hard enough to get students to take arts subjects without parents and students saying but the H1 rate is so low, I can't take a chance. So we lose all our best students at LC. Can't blame them, its a points race. If they are three times more likely to get a H1 in Biology than Music then its a rare student that will stick with music

If anyone wants access to the chart generating google sheet pop me a mail.

The other side is the fail rates in the science subjects is very high, whereas there’s a low fail rate in music.

mirrorwall14

chocoholic999 wrote: »

The other side is the fail rates in the science subjects is very high, whereas there’s a low fail rate in music.

I know and I would argue that its most likely at least partially caused by this trend away from the bell curves. More and more students who may be more suited to the arts are being encouraged/forced by media/parents/Minister to take the sciences.

If the cohorts are large enough, shouldn't statistics win through? Our fail rate should be higher, the H1 rate should be lower.

I don't think the low fail rate does any favours to students either because they think "sure no one fails this subject" etc

chocoholic999

I speak to students every year that seem to feel they should take at least one science subject regardless of their interest or suitability. As Biology is perceived as the easiest it has huge numbers taking it. More students take higher level Biology than Irish.

Reati

evolving_doors wrote: »

It's a fact that people fail maths every year. It's one of the 3 core subjects so students have to do the subject whether they like it or not.

What's the fail rate on other exams? Would maths be higher?

r93kaey5p2izun

I think Maths will always have a high failure rate due to dyscalculia. There are no reasonable accommodations for dyscalculia. No exemptions. And little to no help, support or practical strategies for students and teachers in dealing with it. Imagine we went back to no accommodations or exemptions for dyslexia and just think what the failure rate would be in other subjects. And back to most affected students being left undiagnosed and unsupported. There are other issues going on with Maths but personally I find the situation regarding dyscalculia infuriating and depressing.

mirrorwall14

chocoholic999 wrote: »

I speak to students every year that seem to feel they should take at least one science subject regardless of their interest or suitability. As Biology is perceived as the easiest it has huge numbers taking it. More students take higher level Biology than Irish.

Its mad isn't it? And its pushed pushed pushed across the board. I get asked "Why take music, I'll never use it?" when a large cohort of the students forcing themselves through a science subject will never use it either

Reati

Kendall Gray Sandstorm wrote: »

I think Maths will always have a high failure rate due to dyscalculia. There are no reasonable accommodations for dyscalculia. No exemptions. And little to no help, support or practical strategies for students and teachers in dealing with it. Imagine we went back to no accommodations or exemptions for dyslexia and just think what the failure rate would be in other subjects. And back to most affected students being left undiagnosed and unsupported. There are other issues going on with Maths but personally I find the situation regarding dyscalculia infuriating and depressing.

Never knew something like that exist. Should have guessed, there is a condition for everything these days.

Sounds like a good honours math question for next year.

Estimates of the prevalence of dyscalculia range between 3 and 6% of the population. Based on this, how many people will fail the ordinary maths exam due to this condition and what is the probability the IT will lead with a maths based headline.

evolving_doors

Reati wrote: »

What's the fail rate on other exams? Would maths be higher?

Yes. The stats are here https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.3596894.1534314343!/menu/standard/file/15-08-18_IT_BSZ_06_CW.pdf
Accountancy is a bit of an anomoly but I know from students that many see this as an extra subject just in case!

Come to think of it going by last years maths results the headline should have read...

"THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS FAILING MATHS HAS DECREASED.. HORRAY!!!"

Lies_and_Statistics.JPG

Edit: I didn't attach the OL because the grade change is negligible. There is a large increase in the numbers failing FL maths though, but then again numbers wise it is 'only' about 100 students.



There is a bit of shuffling going on with this comment but they do mention it later.

The proportion who failed the higher-level paper, by contrast, was just under 2 per cent.

This is because the H7 (30-39%) isn't counted as a fail where as it is for Ordinary level.
Nearly 8% of students taking the higher level are getting below 40%!!! You'ld have to ask what exactly are they learning from their experience in the class. They would be far better off progressing through much the same material with a better understanding of it. I think there is mutterings of doing away with the bonus points though.

byhookorbycrook

Reati wrote: »

Never knew something like that exist. Should have guessed, there is a condition for everything these days.

Sounds like a good honours math question for next year.

Really, are you a teacher?

evolving_doors

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Really, are you a teacher?

Don't think they are, but how and ever it would be a common enough perception amongst public about dyscalculia. At least they've learned something new now

Reati

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Really, are you a teacher?

Which bit would you like pick a fight about?

1. Not knowing such a condition existed?
2. The fact I should have guessed it existed?
3. My Profession?
4. The great LC math question I came up with?

It's your call on which one you use to be winning the internet today

Reati

evolving_doors wrote: »

Don't think they are, but how and ever it would be a common enough perception amongst public about dyscalculia. At least they've learned something new now

Indeed I'm not. And you are right, I had no idea such a thing existed but have researched it and was fascinated to learn more about it. I'd agree most people wouldn't know about it as with a prevalence of 3 and 6% of the general population it's not a thing most will encounter or think about. I'm sure the general view is the "little ****" is just lazy.

Building on it as a theory, wouldn't that prevalence make it likely a small contributing factor in the math failure rate here?

As as an aside, thank you for how you approached your reply.

mirrorwall14

Reati wrote: »

Indeed I'm not. And you are right, I had no idea such a thing existed but have researched it and was fascinated to learn more about it. I'd agree most people wouldn't know about it as with a prevalence of 3 and 6% of the general population it's not a thing most will encounter or think about. I'm sure the general view is the "little ****" is just lazy.

Building on it as a theory, wouldn't that prevalence make it likely a small contributing factor in the math failure rate here?

As as an aside, thank you for how you approached your reply.

There's a few contributing factors I think and I would argue the failure rate in maths aren't horribly out of line with similar levels (i.e. comparing OL with OL).

There are one main contributing factor to Maths being above average particularly at OL and why its always reported on as opposed to other subjects.

Maths is a requirement for a lot of college course in the country regardless of whether you need it or not. Many of them do not accept foundation level for matriculation. This means that students (with dyscalculia or not) are desperate to pass OL maths regardless of whether they are capable of it or not. And in their defence it worth the gamble for them. If they fail OL maths they won't get their college course, if they manage to scrape a pass they will. If they don't gamble then they definitely cannot go to college.

This means that in a lot of schools the bottom OL class is made up of students who are largely not really capable of it but they and the teacher are trying to get them through so they can get their course.

r93kaey5p2izun

Students believing they need OL Maths for their course is a problem. But Trinity accept Foundation for matriculation and NUI only require Maths for matriculation for Commerce and Science courses. Of course some courses will have specific Maths requirements in addition to general matriculation but these are courses people struggling with Maths should not be doing. Personally I don't believe OL is worth the gamble for most of those in the bottom Ordinary Level class. Passing Foundation gives them some options. Failing Ordinary rules out an awful lot.

I'm finding though that nearly every trade apprenticeship requires Ordinary Level and that's a big barrier for a lot of students. It may not be an official requirement to register but no companies will accept them without it.

mirrorwall14

Kendall Gray Sandstorm wrote: »

Students believing they need OL Maths for their course is a problem. But Trinity and accept Foundation for matriculation and NUI only require Maths for matriculation for Commerce and Science courses. Of course some courses will have specific Maths requirements in addition to general matriculation but these are courses people struggling with Maths should not be doing. Personally I don't believe OL is worth the gamble for most of those in the bottom Ordinary Level class. Passing Foundation gives them some options. Failing Ordinary rules out an awful lot.

I'm finding though that nearly every trade apprenticeship requires Ordinary Level and that's a big barrier for a lot of students. It may not be an official requirement to register but no companies will accept them without it.

Apologies I completely forgot the apprenticeships which I agree creates perhaps even a bigger issue than the colleges depending on the school

byhookorbycrook

Reati wrote: »

Which bit would you like pick a fight about?

1. Not knowing such a condition existed?
2. The fact I should have guessed it existed?
3. My Profession?
4. The great LC math question I came up with?

It's your call on which one you use to be winning the internet today

Not picking a fight at all , but am quite surprised that a maths teacher has never heard of it.