ReOPENed>>>Leaving Cert Reform. The propaganda begins >>>See Warning>>>

clunked

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/leaving-cert-deemed-by-just-4-of-pupils-as-fair-test-of-knowledge-1.3749258.


Nothing about additional workload for teachers amazingly though:).

Icsics

clunked wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/leaving-cert-deemed-by-just-4-of-pupils-as-fair-test-of-knowledge-1.3749258.


Nothing about additional workload for teachers amazingly though:).

Yes, all sorts of 'reports' & 'working papers' on the NCCA website. There should be a thorough review of how the JC 'reform' is going before they start dismantling the LC. 'Continuous assement' is not the easy option students seem to think it is.

Mardy Bum

Head of the NAPD is exceptionally biased on this topic. Very worrying.

amacca

It should sit nicely with grade inflation in third level institutions and "meeting targets"


Was the survey "what do you want" distributed widely amongst teachers....I haven't heard any of my former colleagues mention it......hundreds of response doesn't exactly represent a fair sample to my mind...defintely not something decisions like this should be based upon.

I wonder if the questions were leading or chosen specifically to favour an outcome and what body independently assessed this

Was there any mention of high contact hours, high pupil teacher ratios, poor resourcing, promotion system as open to abuse as it always was (perhaps moreso favouring the bull**** merchants) and how reforms might take this into account if they truly are reforms and how failure to even acknowledge never mind do something about these issues might impact on delivery

Was feedback given that shows nuanced comments/any other section responses were taken into account etc

You'd get fairly tired of surveys saying what the creators want them to.

Terri26

I don't know anybody who answered this survey either. Some students are in favour of Continuous Assessment as some of them don't fully understand it, but that's fair enough. The biggest clue that the results are skewed is the result that apparently 51%of students are in favour of their own teachers correcting the work for final marks. None of my students have ever even been slightly in favour of this. They know the drawbacks of it and how it will totally change the relationship between students and teachers.

maynooth_rules

Imagine having the gaule to try and push this through when we are in the middle of a shambolic JC reform that will have to backtracks on within 5 years.
All you have to do is look at voice for teachers on Facebook over the weekend. Post after post of stressed out teachers, caused in no small part by 'reform'. We have, and have had, one of the worlds leading education system. Why are we so intent on wrecking it and dumbing it down?

troyzer

Lads just saw this on the main page and genuinely curious.

What is the main reason that teachers don't want to correct their students exams?

Franz Von Peppercorn

troyzer wrote: »

Lads just saw this on the main page and genuinely curious.

What is the main reason that teachers don't want to correct their students exams?

Clearly there could be bias, or accusations of bias. Why would we remove anonymity.

troyzer

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

Lads just saw this on the main page and genuinely curious.

What is the main reason that teachers don't want to correct their students exams?

Clearly there could be bias, or accusations of bias. Why would we remove anonymity.

But sure it works in universities?

Nermal

Why does anyone care what students think? Of course they want an easier, less stressful exam. So what? Exams are hard. Life is hard. HTFU.

The LC is a beacon of objectivity and fairness in a country that has historically had a problem with a ‘who you know’ culture. Long may it stay so.

Franz Von Peppercorn

troyzer wrote: »

But sure it works in universities?

Much larger groups of students in general, a large lecture hall is not a small school room.

Mr.H

troyzer wrote:

What is the main reason that teachers don't want to correct their students exams?

Purely the extra work the poor things.

Ridiculous we still use a system where teachers train students how to pass exams. The leaving cert is nothing to do with teaching and learning.

But yea lets not give the teachers extra work.

Ffs no wonder we have one of the worst education systems in the developed world.

troyzer

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

But sure it works in universities?

Much larger groups of students in general, a large lecture hall is not a small school room.

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

evolving_doors

troyzer wrote: »

Lads just saw this on the main page and genuinely curious.

What is the main reason that teachers don't want to correct their students exams?

The thing is, we have always been correcting student exams, so no teacher would mind that remaining.

Correcting your own students' state exams which can have an impact on college progression... I'd prefer the system to be standardised and anonymous across all of the schools in Ireland to give everyone a fair shot.
Now I know that there's socio-economic disadvantage meaning that some students don't have the same access to grinds and all that, but I don't see that as being connected to teacher certification.

evolving_doors

clunked wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/leaving-cert-deemed-by-just-4-of-pupils-as-fair-test-of-knowledge-1.3749258.


Nothing about additional workload for teachers amazingly though:).

Breaking News Headline: Majority of teenagers say "That's so unfair!".

troyzer

By the way, I'm not saying I agree with continuous assessment in schools.

I think there's a lot of merit to the blunt but largely fair leaving cert. Although grinds and the performance of private schools show that you can still pay your way to success.

And I also don't care that teenagers want continuous assessment, of course they do.

But I also think that I studied German in school for six years and can't speak the language. Irish for 13. My French is better than my Irish and I only started a few months ago.

There is something broken in the current system. It is not educating young people, it's preparing then for an exam.

BrianBoru00

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

What course was that? Because that's why it's a lot easier to be objective.
But instead of having 200 on your course , the Leaving Cert has 50 000+ others on your course.

Do you want each teacher to set their own papers?
Who is going to compare all of the papers throughout the country and ensure they meet the same criteria and more importantly who is going to pay them ?

brookers

I have children who will be sitting the leaving cert in a few years. Would love if they dropped Irish as a compulsory subject. Then concentrate on the subjects they like. More subjects like film and TV studies, IT, web design, you tube all that kind of stuff. History, Geography, economics, the sciences. Languages that are useful. Do Irish if you love it or like it. Social studies, races religion. Open up the whole thing, bring out the best in people. Not all kids want to go to Trinity and get 700 points....

hotmail.com

Teachers are products of the system. They benefited from the LC and the points system and they don't want to see it changed.

judeboy101

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

You've answered your own question. Your supervisor knew you, hence you got the result you did.

troyzer

judeboy101 wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

You've answered your own question. Your supervisor knew you, hence you got the result you did.

I failed to get the result I wanted/needed.

It wasn't a favourable one given by a supervisor who liked me.

In fact, it was my low grade on the final project which brought me down below a first.

BrianBoru00

troyzer wrote: »

By the way, I'm not saying I agree with continuous assessment in schools.

I think there's a lot of merit to the blunt but largely fair leaving cert. Although grinds and the performance of private schools show that you can still pay your way to success.

And I also don't care that teenagers want continuous assessment, of course they do.

But I also think that I studied German in school for six years and can't speak the language. Irish for 13. My French is better than my Irish and I only started a few months ago.

There is something broken in the current system. It is not educating young people, it's preparing then for an exam.

1. You can pay for grinds and private school but in June everything is equal and sits the same exams in the same conditions with allowances made if you have disabilities or illness and the guy from the council house has the same opportunity on the day as the princess from the mansion.

2. The biggest reason we can't speak Irish is we don't. Of course your French is better - you're using it every day.

3. The biggest problem with the leaving cert is parents and media spouting on about how much pressure its putting on the snowflakes children. STOP , and stop with the talk about it being the be all and end all. Every teacher I know goes in to the profession with the aim of educating the students and helping them to grow as people as well as prepare them for the terminal exam.
But if every single year the same Sh*te about points is been spouted in the media instead of encouraging people to fill out the CAO and also look at other options such as going into an apprentice ship in traditional trades or accounting etc.

judeboy101

troyzer wrote: »

I failed to get the result I wanted/needed.

It wasn't a favourable one given by a supervisor who liked me.

In fact, it was my low grade on the final project which brought me down below a first.

Never, said anything about liking, I said you got the result you got because your supervisor knew you

troyzer

BrianBoru00 wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

By the way, I'm not saying I agree with continuous assessment in schools.

I think there's a lot of merit to the blunt but largely fair leaving cert. Although grinds and the performance of private schools show that you can still pay your way to success.

And I also don't care that teenagers want continuous assessment, of course they do.

But I also think that I studied German in school for six years and can't speak the language. Irish for 13. My French is better than my Irish and I only started a few months ago.

There is something broken in the current system. It is not educating young people, it's preparing then for an exam.

1. You can pay for grinds and private school but in June everything is equal and sits the same exams in the same conditions with allowances made if you have disabilities or illness and the guy from the council house has the same opportunity on the day as the princess from the mansion.

2. The biggest reason we can't speak Irish is we don't. Of course your French is better - you're using it every day.

3. The biggest problem with the leaving cert is parents and media spouting on about how much pressure its putting on the snowflakes children. STOP , and stop with the talk about it being the be all and end all. Every teacher I know goes in to the profession with the aim of educating the students and helping them to grow as people as well as prepare them for the terminal exam.
But if every single year the same Sh*te about points is been spouted in the media instead of encouraging people to fill out the CAO and also look at other options such as going into an apprentice ship in traditional trades or accounting etc.

1. Everything is equal in June but the rich kids will have had better teachers and grinds along the way. It does make a difference. Not that I think continuous assessment would be any better. But I don't think the current system is class proof in that way. Although it's certainly better than many other systems.

2. I don't use French every day. I practice it on memrise the odd time.

3. There's a lot of Truth in what you're saying here but all I can say is from my experience (did my leaving cert in 2011) it was entirely the teachers putting the fear of God into my year. None of my family had ever been to University so there was no real pressure there. I also was also too buried in Angry Birds and Temple Run to care about the latest Irish Times article on the CAO. What I knew, I got from my teachers. And they put a huge amount of pressure on us.

I also don't agree that teachers are there to grow pupils as adults. You might get the odd one who goes the extra mile, does extra curricular work etc. but these weren't very common for me.

Trades etc. were never discussed as an option. LCA was openly shunned.

troyzer

judeboy101 wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

I failed to get the result I wanted/needed.

It wasn't a favourable one given by a supervisor who liked me.

In fact, it was my low grade on the final project which brought me down below a first.

Never, said anything about liking, I said you got the result you got because your supervisor knew you

Right, that's a pretty outlandish claim. I got my grade because I worked hard and deserved it.

You're aware that universities also have an external examiner who checks over your project and interviews you to see if you're a spoofer?

This could be incorporated into the leaving cert.

evolving_doors

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

Does that mean we have to be getting absolutely hammered with students now? :pac:
Just kidding...

So let's go through it then.

Q1. You'd be happy for me to grade one of my own classes' leaving cert exams.

Q2. Would you be prefer to see the pay increment system changed to a performance based metric?

joe40

I have worked in the north for over 20 years and been through the whole process of teacher assesed work at GCSE and A - level. Currently the whole system is going back to fully external assessment with less teacher input or control.
There is no point comparing third level with secondary level.
One thing the North still has (less so in Britain) is modular courses which I do like. It gives pupils information on where they are at and can act as a wake up call before terminal exams.
Why can the Irish system just not look across the water without repeating the same mistakes

troyzer

evolving_doors wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

Does that mean we have to be getting absolutely hammered with students now? :pac:
Just kidding...

So let's go through it then.

Q1. You'd be happy for me to grade one of my own classes' leaving cert exams.

Q2. Would you be prefer to see the pay increment system changed to a performance based metric?

1. I don't know yet. Just interested to hear the counter arguments.

2. No. Teaching is a job like any other. I don't appreciate the right wing zealots who think the whole world should work on commission. That being said, teachers should face performance reviews and get bonuses. But also get sacked if they're crap. We've all had teachers who were just shocking and shouldn't be allowed to keep teaching.

evolving_doors

troyzer wrote: »

1. I don't know yet. Just interested to hear the counter arguments.

2. No. Teaching is a job like any other. I don't appreciate the right wing zealots who think the whole world should work on commission. That being said, teachers should face performance reviews and get bonuses. But also get sacked if they're crap. We've all had teachers who were just shocking and shouldn't be allowed to keep teaching.

So if my students get better grades I get a bigger bonus.

BrianBoru00

troyzer wrote: »

1. Everything is equal in June but the rich kids will have had better teachers and grinds along the way. It does make a difference. Not that I think continuous assessment would be any better. But I don't think the current system is class proof in that way. Although it's certainly better than many other systems.

And that s the point exactly - It's all well and good saying change the system but no one can come up with anything that is going to be fairer to date.

troyzer wrote: »

2. I don't use French every day. I practice it on memrise the odd time.

Do you practice Irish the odd time - its not really that its specific to you but the general "weren't taught properly" is a bit of a lazy generalisation. Like I have a college education but I didn't truly understand some of the topics until I was using them on a daily basis years later.

troyzer wrote: »

3. There's a lot of Truth in what you're saying here but all I can say is from my experience (did my leaving cert in 2011) it was entirely the teachers putting the fear of God into my year. None of my family had ever been to University so there was no real pressure there. I also was also too buried in Angry Birds and Temple Run to care about the latest Irish Times article on the CAO. What I knew, I got from my teachers. And they put a huge amount of pressure on us.

Again, its not specific to you but this gross generalisation is the same spin about pressure coming from the people who are creating the pressure .

troyzer wrote: »

I also don't agree that teachers are there to grow pupils as adults. You might get the odd one who goes the extra mile, does extra curricular work etc. but these weren't very common for me.

It depends on what the extra mile is, very often it can be challenging a pupil in class trying different ways to motivate them , not necessarily out on a rugby pitch or coaching a choir.

troyzer wrote: »

Trades etc. were never discussed as an option. LCA was openly shunned.

Yep, this would be a big bug bear of mine (And most teachers) is the lack of guidance counsellors which were cut in the recession and even then the role was supposed to include counselling as a main part of the post instead of a dedicated career guidance teacher.

rainbowtrout

troyzer wrote: »

1. Everything is equal in June but the rich kids will have had better teachers and grinds along the way. It does make a difference. Not that I think continuous assessment would be any better. But I don't think the current system is class proof in that way. Although it's certainly better than many other systems.

Not true. All teachers in this country have the same qualification. Rich kids, as you put it have the resources to access fee paying schools. They come from families where parents are interested in their education and progression to third level. There is a drive there to succeed. Kids going to grind schools are not subjected to any magical teacher, they are expected to learn off bundles of notes on a 12-13 hour working day for the year. Kids accessing fee paying education are in classes with other kids from a similar background, so the overall vibe is to be competitive and do well.

Your average kid going to a community school in a town where there is only one secondary school encounters a very different situation, and a wider range of ability and support from home for the attending students. A more variable set of results - but it doesn't mean the teachers are crap.

Plenty of poorly performing teachers in fee paying schools too, only it is masked by the ability of the parents to pay for grinds.

Franz Von Peppercorn

The grade inflation at university might be an argument against continuous assessment or teacher assessment.

acequion

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

I'm sorry but I find it impossible to take you seriously. You got "hammered" by a lecturer who graded you! Seriously? And you find that normal? Now I got hammered myself plenty of times back in the day but I could more easily picture myself in a hot tub with the pope than getting hammered with one of my lecturers. The poster who suggested that that's why you under performed for this lecturer may well have a point.

Also the idea of having dinner with another of your lecturers in his house makes me uncomfortable. And it's all because I'm convinced that a suitable, professional distance has to be maintained between teacher and student of any age for there to be any hope of objectivity in assessment. A teacher /lecturer is not a buddy.

In fact your story exemplifies why anonymous,impersonal assessment is by far the best policy.

troyzer

acequion wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

I graduated with 14 people.

I knew my lecturers by their first names, got absolutely hammered with them and I even had dinner with my project supervisor and his wife in his house.

I never once felt like he wasn't able to be objective and in the end I came just short of first class honours which I needed for a PhD I was targeting.

It's just laziness to suggest it can't be done in schools.

I'm sorry but I find it impossible to take you seriously. You got "hammered" by a lecturer who graded you! Seriously? And you find that normal? Now I got hammered myself plenty of times back in the day but I could more easily picture myself in a hot tub with the pope than getting hammered with one of my lecturers. The poster who suggested that that's why you under performed for this lecturer may well have a point.

Also the idea of having dinner with another of your lecturers in his house makes me uncomfortable. And it's all because I'm convinced that a suitable, professional distance has to be maintained between teacher and student of any age for there to be any hope of objectivity in assessment. A teacher /lecturer is not a buddy.

In fact your story exemplifies why anonymous,impersonal assessment is by far the best policy.

Which is a fair opinion but ultimately I felt like my grade was appropriate. I was disappointed not to get a first but as I said already, an external examiner agreed with the grading on my final project. The fact that I knew my supervisor made no difference in the end.

My degree is in a field well known for its heavy drinking and socialising. In that context, it wasn't unusual at all to be on the piss with lecturers.

There was a large overseas field trip component.

amacca

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The grade inflation at university might be an argument against continuous assessment or teacher assessment.

I very much believe it is.

rainbowtrout

troyzer wrote: »

My degree is in a field well known for its heavy drinking and socialising. In that context, it wasn't unusual at all to be on the piss with lecturers.

I would say that a lot of college students go on the piss for 3-4 years regardless of course. Can't say any particular 'field' was known for heavy drinking when I was in college. College students are known in general for heavy drinking. Don't know anyone that used to do it with college lecturers though.

troyzer

rainbowtrout wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

My degree is in a field well known for its heavy drinking and socialising. In that context, it wasn't unusual at all to be on the piss with lecturers.

I would say that a lot of college students go on the piss for 3-4 years regardless of course. Can't say any particular 'field' was known for heavy drinking when I was in college. College students are known in general for heavy drinking. Don't know anyone that used to do it with college lecturers though.

It's quite a niché field not taught in many universities which is particularly known for its heavy drinking.

I'm not talking about just college drinking in general. Working professionals in this field drink quite heavily because of the amount of field work.

Anyway, it's beside the point. Just take my word for it, it's not strange to have gone drinking with my lecturers.

Although in general I agree it would be weird.

amacca

everyone is now bursting with curiosity over what this heavy drinking niche field is..


please don't tell in case it would be identifying and anyway speculation is so much more fun


Internataional baccalaureate in microbrewery set up and funding combined with ecommerce and marketing.

troyzer

amacca wrote: »

everyone is now bursting with curiosity over what this heavy drinking niche field is..


please don't tell in case it would be identifying and anyway speculation is so much more fun


Internataional baccalaureate in microbrewery set up and funding combined with ecommerce and marketing.

rainbowtrout

amacca wrote: »

everyone is now bursting with curiosity over what this heavy drinking niche field is..

It's probably something like archaeology....

troyzer

rainbowtrout wrote: »

amacca wrote: »

everyone is now bursting with curiosity over what this heavy drinking niche field is..

It's probably something like archaeology....

Probably.

Anyway, I'm open to suggestions on how to improve the leaving cert outside of introducing continuous assessment.

But it does need to be changed in some way.

amacca

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's probably something like archaeology....

I briefly considered archaeology ......... perhaps I made the wrong decision not considering it further, I thought it was all dusty old ruins and consulting on preservations orders, I had no idea they were such bon viveurs!

amacca

troyzer wrote: »

Anyway, I'm open to suggestions on how to improve the leaving cert outside of introducing continuous assessment.

But it does need to be changed in some way.

This is not really about introducing continuous assessment itself....I'm not sure many would object to that idea at all ...its the standard of qualification and how and who is doing the assessment that I believe people have the issue with. Personally I think the way its been done is a shambles. My only hope is that they will realise what utter bolox the new Jc has been in some areas to this point and maybe tinker with it so its not a complete farce down the line (let the powers that be save face even though it is their mess up as this sort of mess up will affect students lives negatively down the line)

But to answer your question beyond just introducing continuous assessment ....and as that type of assessment doesn't take place in a vacuum with no connection to anything else...

Perhaps a start could be made on reducing pupil teacher ratios...I have to laugh when the powers that be suggest high pupil teacher ratios have no bearing on educational outcomes

Then maybe we could move on to thinking about reducing contact hours.

After that providing proper resources for these "new" methodologies might be thought about...as one poster here quite humorously observed teaching was the one job where they stole stationery from home to bring into their place of work rather than the other way around

We might leave out proper support/disciplinary back up for the small cohort of students (not always, not always the ones with diagnosed EBDs or almost never the ones with mild or sever learning difficulties) that are disruptive and continue to be but most classes and schools find themselves with very little to do but put up with them due to the legislative framework surrounding peoples right to education but complete lack of responsibility when accessing (some parents very much included here) ---- that seems to be an awful can of worms altogether.


Then we could talk about really properly assessing the effectiveness of many of these "new" methodologies and management systems in a school setting with the above problems with an eye on the uk system with its staff turnover/teacher burnout problems and just how good for a students education treating their teachers this way really is. Increasing levels of box ticking admin and paperwork and "planning for planning for planning" could be looked at....most teachers signed up to teach not spend a larger portion of their time administrating - and if it is the case that all this to my mind mostly superfluous activity is necessary for each individual teacher then massive reductions in other teaching work should be considered - the system needs to prioritise does it want teachers teaching or box ticking - while they are not entirely mutually exclusive the latter is definitely detrimental to the former.

We could also have a conversation about the inspections process and just how much of this "reform" is simply a cohort of people justifying their own existence while pushing through "cost saving" measures which could in some peoples opinion more justifiably be called yellow packing measures.

Assessing the fairness and transparency of the new promotions system (how fair and transparent is it really?)

I could add more


If its reform we are embarking upon then theres a hell of a lot of reform to do yet beyond the fluffy sparkly new JC.

joe40

I also think part of our problem is keeping pupils in a academic style learning environment when it clearly does not suit everyone.
There should also be well resourced and relevant education/training programs available for post 16 students. This should have equal status to academic pathways and equally valued.
Unfortunately this does not come cheap. Much cheaper to put a teacher and a whiteboard in front of 30 seventeen year olds, rather than a well resourced and valued training program which will require much smaller tutor pupil ratio and more equipment.
A 16 year old boy or girl considering trades or other practical careers get no opportunity to explore this until after 18. That is too long. Every secondary teacher out there has experience pupils that are getting nothing from school after a certain stage. They may or may not be disruptive but they are getting nothing from school.

Icsics

joe40 wrote: »

I also think part of our problem is keeping pupils in a academic style learning environment when it clearly does not suit everyone.
There should also be well resourced and relevant education/training programs available for post 16 students. This should have equal status to academic pathways and equally valued.
Unfortunately this does not come cheap. Much cheaper to put a teacher and a whiteboard in front of 30 seventeen year olds, rather than a well resourced and valued training program which will require much smaller tutor pupil ratio and more equipment.
A 16 year old boy or girl considering trades or other practical careers get no opportunity to explore this until after 18. That is too long. Every secondary teacher out there has experience pupils that are getting nothing from school after a certain stage. They may or may not be disruptive but they are getting nothing from school.

Completely agree Joe. We're forever hearing about 'international models' of education to push through continuous assessment but the model of vocational training is completely ignored. But it confirms what we've always said, the 'reform' in the Irish ed system equates to saving money.

amacca

Icsics wrote: »

Completely agree Joe. We're forever hearing about 'international models' of education to push through continuous assessment but the model of vocational training is completely ignored. But it confirms what we've always said, the 'reform' in the Irish ed system equates to saving money.

I know exactly what you meant but I would add to that statement

It amounts to short term savings which will probably be long term costs imo. And I believe what savings were are will be offset by much greater costs.

troyzer

amacca wrote: »

Icsics wrote: »

Completely agree Joe. We're forever hearing about 'international models' of education to push through continuous assessment but the model of vocational training is completely ignored. But it confirms what we've always said, the 'reform' in the Irish ed system equates to saving money.

I know exactly what you meant but I would add to that statement

It amounts to short term savings which will probably be long term costs imo. And I believe what savings were are will be offset by much greater costs.

But your version of reform coincidentally involves massive investment and improved working conditions for teachers before even looking at anything else.

I'm not saying you're wrong about the government cynically using "reform" as a catch phrase to save money. But again, nearly everything you said involves a lot of spending and better conditions for teachers.

You couldn't identify one low hanging fruit of inefficiencies on the part of teachers which costs nothing to fix?

joe40

troyzer wrote: »

amacca wrote: »

Icsics wrote: »

Completely agree Joe. We're forever hearing about 'international models' of education to push through continuous assessment but the model of vocational training is completely ignored. But it confirms what we've always said, the 'reform' in the Irish ed system equates to saving money.

I know exactly what you meant but I would add to that statement

It amounts to short term savings which will probably be long term costs imo. And I believe what savings were are will be offset by much greater costs.

But your version of reform coincidentally involves massive investment and improved working conditions for teachers before even looking at anything else.

I'm not saying you're wrong about the government cynically using "reform" as a catch phrase to save money. But again, nearly everything you said involves a lot of spending and better conditions for teachers.

You couldn't identify one low hanging fruit of inefficiencies on the part of teachers which costs nothing to fix?

Currently in England if you have degree in chemistry, physics maths etc you will receive a bursary of 15 to 20 000 pounds to train as a teacher, with no conditions attached. That is what happens when a profession is slowly eroded and undermined. Teaching is still a good job here and attracts quality people. My own kids are in secondary school in Donegal and I cannot fault the work they are doing in school and the attitude of their teachers ( much better than years ago)
This discussion is about assessment which has to be standardised and impartial across 1000s of kids. Difficult to achieve with teacher assessment at a formal stage

gaiscioch

clunked wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/leaving-cert-deemed-by-just-4-of-pupils-as-fair-test-of-knowledge-1.3749258.


Nothing about additional workload for teachers amazingly though:).

Always good to see The Irish Times being that critical voice impartially reporting every story the Department and its various fonctionnaires in state-funded quangos feed it.

I suppose our intrepid journalists wouldn't wish to alienate their "government sources" and "exclusives" by highlighting the consequences of this egregious misnomer which they brazenly call "reform". When this blatant dumbing down of educational standards is faced up to down the road, watch The Irish Times try to take the high ground then while being spineless, sycophantic and obsequious as ever to newspaper-filling government spin now, when it matters.

amacca

troyzer wrote: »

But your version of reform coincidentally involves massive investment and improved working conditions for teachers before even looking at anything else.

Well thats not entirely true - the reform that has been currently embarked upon does not look at any of the issues I have highlighted - I was just providing balance

All of the reform so far has coincidentally involved reduction in investment and much reduced working conditions for teachers and most likely disimproved standards of education for students in the long run due to this

troyzer wrote: »

I'm not saying you're wrong about the government cynically using "reform" as a catch phrase to save money. But again, nearly everything you said involves a lot of spending and better conditions for teachers.

Which I would argue means improved educational conditions for students...some people don't seem to get the link...

The average time a person spends in teaching in the UK is about 5 years.....how good is that for the students.

troyzer wrote: »

You couldn't identify one low hanging fruit of inefficiencies on the part of teachers which costs nothing to fix?

But why ignore the potential future inefficiencies Ive outlined (and they have the potential to be massive inefficiencies) , these could be low hanging fruit if the powers that be had an iota of imagination and weren't simply trying to either cover their own arses, ring fence their own plots or curry favour with the powers that be. Its hugely inefficient to change a system to try ape a dysfunctional one a ferry trip across the water......the simple fact is, education costs money....you don't resource it properly, respect your workers then it won't work efficiently in the long run and that will probably end up costing the state more down the line....Teachers are the easy target in a much bigger game driven by an ideology which won't ultimately work in an educational setting.

One other low hanging fruit Id suggest would be find out what core group within NCCA is responsible for the new JC syllabus document (and not the poor low level plebs that spell checked it) and ask them if they'd like to have another go or actually do something useful with their lives...go on just read it if you think the new JC which will soon become the new LC is a good idea ...as I understand it a civil war of sorts took place due to the new "specifications"

.....anyway my opinion is reform is a two way street, There is evidence aplenty that whats currently happening ultimately results in massive staff turnover and isn't good for educational outcomes so why persist. Afaic teachers are more sinned against than sinning in this scenario...this "reform" doesn't deserve the name and it shouldn't be up to turkeys to vote for christmas ...

acequion

amacca wrote: »

Well thats not entirely true - the reform that has been currently embarked upon does not look at any of the issues I have highlighted - I was just providing balance

All of the reform so far has coincidentally involved reduction in investment and much reduced working conditions for teachers and most likely disimproved standards of education for students in the long run due to this



Which I would argue means improved educational conditions for students...some people don't seem to get the link...

The average time a person spends in teaching in the UK is about 5 years.....how good is that for the students.




But why ignore the potential future inefficiencies Ive outlined (and they have the potential to be massive inefficiencies) , these could be low hanging fruit if the powers that be had an iota of imagination and weren't simply trying to either cover their own arses, ring fence their own plots or curry favour with the powers that be. Its hugely inefficient to change a system to try ape a dysfunctional one a ferry trip across the water......the simple fact is, education costs money....you don't resource it properly, respect your workers then it won't work efficiently in the long run and that will probably end up costing the state more down the line....Teachers are the easy target in a much bigger game driven by an ideology which won't ultimately work in an educational setting.

One other low hanging fruit Id suggest would be find out what core group within NCCA is responsible for the new JC syllabus document (and not the poor low level plebs that spell checked it) and ask them if they'd like to have another go or actually do something useful with their lives...go on just read it if you think the new JC which will soon become the new LC is a good idea ...as I understand it a civil war of sorts took place due to the new "specifications"

.....anyway my opinion is reform is a two way street, There is evidence aplenty that whats currently happening ultimately results in massive staff turnover and isn't good for educational outcomes so why persist. Afaic teachers are more sinned against than sinning in this scenario...this "reform" doesn't deserve the name and it shouldn't be up to turkeys to vote for christmas ...

Brilliant post amacca,thank you. You constantly and consistently post about the need for sufficient resourcing and humane working conditions and the link between these and good educational outcomes and as you rightly point out many people just don't or won't get this. Probably because of the media propaganda and the relentless casting of the teacher in the role of fall guy /bad guy. And this resonates with many among the adult population, because well, they all went to school and there were a hell of lot more inefficient teachers around back then. Just as there were a hell of a lot more inefficient everything. And unfortunately many see the neo liberal agenda as the way to go, reduce state funding to a minimum in the name of the euphemistically termed "reforms" and work those public servants, especially teachers with their long holidays, till they drop.

Such a shame that you rarely to never see articles in the papers explaining it all from another, more balanced perspective, as you so eloquently do. But that perspective doesn't suit the agenda,so doesn't get published and the public are largely unaware of how potentially disastrous this whole "reform" agenda really is.