Leaving Cert calculated grades designed to ensure girls perform better than boys

Coybig_

So Leaving Cert results this year are being weighted to ensure girls outperform boys.

Absolutely disgraceful really. To intentionally weight results so that girls perform better is blatant discrimination.

If there is an imbalance in results toward gender from years gone by, that the people in charge feel the need to mark girls better to account for it, then that shows a need to reform the way subjects are taught and examined.

Can you imagine if this was the other way around? Would be world news with the furore that would be drummed up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/education/girls-to-do-better-than-boys-in-calculated-grade-leaving-cert-exams-as-gender-trends-will-be-built-into-results-39454619.html

JasonStatham

Coybig_ wrote: »

So Leaving Cert results this year are being weighted to ensure girls outperform boys.

Absolutely disgraceful really. To intentionally weight results so that girls perform better is blatant discrimination.

If there is an imbalance in results toward gender from years gone by, that the people in charge feel the need to mark girls better to account for it, then that shows a need to reform the way subjects are taught and examined.

Can you imagine if this was the other way around? Would be world news with the furore that would be drummed up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/education/girls-to-do-better-than-boys-in-calculated-grade-leaving-cert-exams-as-gender-trends-will-be-built-into-results-39454619.html

Do girls normally do better than boys in the LC year on year? I thought that was the case.

But I think they should have given all good grades.

Take a look at the amount of female only grants and scholarships available for college. You can't help but think that the odds are stacked against young men in pursuing education. Ability, not genitalia should be the deciding factor.

KaneToad

They are looking at results from previous years and using those to standardise this year's results.

Sex will be a factor.
As will location.

It seems the least unfair way to ensure that some level of impartiality gets applied. Past performance is a guide of future performance.

I'm not in favour of gender quotas but this weighting of LC results is transparent and seems fair.

lawred2

JasonStatham wrote: »

Do girls normally do better than boys in the LC year on year? I thought that was the case.

But I think they should have given all good grades.

I think they should have sat the fu(king leaving cert in August/September

Cancelling it was the easy way out at the time but it was clear what assessed grades was going to lead to.

lawred2

KaneToad wrote: »

They are looking at results from previous years and using those to standardise this year's results.

Sex will be a factor.
As will location.

It seems the least unfair way to ensure that some level of impartiality gets applied. Past performance is a guide of future performance.

I'm not in favour of gender quotas but this weighting of LC results is transparent and seems fair.

You haven't been watching goings on in the UK then... their "past performance" algorithm has been a complete disaster. Why would ours be any different?

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

They are looking at results from previous years and using those to standardise this year's results.

Sex will be a factor.
As will location.

It seems the least unfair way to ensure that some level of impartiality gets applied. Past performance is a guide of future performance.

I'm not in favour of gender quotas but this weighting of LC results is transparent and seems fair.

Seems fair..... If you're a girl.

Think about it for a moment, it's not girls grades getting bumped up, it's random boys grades getting bumped down.

suicide_circus

Discriminatory practices which favour men = bad.

Discriminatory practices which favour women = good.

TheValeyard

For the Leaving Cert you were a number. This is going to be a minefield. Location , social status, gender should not play a role in grading.

KaneToad

lawred2 wrote: »

You haven't been watching goings on in the UK then... their "past performance" algorithm has been a complete disaster. Why would ours be any different?

It's not a disaster. It is very accurate at the macro level. However it is unpalatable to some. We only hear from the individuals who were denied the grades they expected. It's become a political decision. The science/logic behind the grades is sound. But the inevitable fall out is too much for the politicians to carry - so they cave in. Style over substance.

Politicians should be making the hard decisions but really they tend to take the path of least resistance - hence we end up in the same cyclical loops.

There are not huge fluctuations in exam results on a yearly basis.

In the absence of the actual sitting of the exams, and a decision to allow teachers to set the predicted grade, there has to be a weighting applied to the results to ensure they tally with previous years.

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

They are looking at results from previous years and using those to standardise this year's results.

Sex will be a factor.
As will location.

It seems the least unfair way to ensure that some level of impartiality gets applied. Past performance is a guide of future performance.

I'm not in favour of gender quotas but this weighting of LC results is transparent and seems fair.

"Past performance is a guide of future performance."

So if you have a group of runners and generally every year the men run quicker. In future YES you can predict that the men should run quicker.

BUT if the race hasn't been run how do you choose which men to bump up on the list?

That's the problem with calculated grades, they are applying inductive reasoning to something which was always deductive.

The word 'calculation' is just window dressing.

JasonStatham

lawred2 wrote: »

I think they should have sat the fu(king leaving cert in August/September

Cancelling it was the easy way out at the time but it was clear what assessed grades was going to lead to.

I agree with this. Government / teacher cop out. What a surprise in backward Ireland.

lawred2

KaneToad wrote: »

It's not a disaster. It is very accurate at the macro level. However it is unpalatable to some. We only hear from the individuals who were denied the grades they expected. It's become a political decision. The science/logic behind the grades is sound. But the inevitable fall out is too much for the politicians to carry - so they cave in. Style over substance.

Politicians should be making the hard decisions but really they tend to take the path of least resistance - hence we end up in the same cyclical loops.

There are not huge fluctuations in exam results on a yearly basis.

In the absence of the actual sitting of the exams, and a decision to allow teachers to set the predicted grade, there has to be a weighting applied to the results to ensure they tally with previous years.

Stopped reading at the macro level.

Sure why bother with exams at all then.

KaneToad

Treppen wrote: »

Seems fair..... If you're a girl.

Think about it for a moment, it's not girls grades getting bumped up, it's random boys grades getting bumped down.

Don't know the figures but Dept of Ed obviously do. They can definitively & scientifically state that X% of boys get this result and Y% of girls get this result. They can base it on averages over multiple years.

They will then weight the predicted grades so that these percentages are maintained. It's not an outrageous move. They will also be weighting on other factors to ensure that these predicted results are in line with previous years.

It's the best way to deal with a not ideal situation.

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

It's not a disaster. It is very accurate at the macro level. However it is unpalatable to some. We only hear from the individuals who were denied the grades they expected. It's become a political decision. The science/logic behind the grades is sound. But the inevitable fall out is too much for the politicians to carry - so they cave in. Style over substance.

Politicians should be making the hard decisions but really they tend to take the path of least resistance - hence we end up in the same cyclical loops.

There are not huge fluctuations in exam results on a yearly basis.

In the absence of the actual sitting of the exams, and a decision to allow teachers to set the predicted grade, there has to be a weighting applied to the results to ensure they tally with previous years.

And herein lies the flaw. YES they can bump up and down grades all over the country on a MACRO level to make sure the curve looks like it always did.

Hooray , problem solved!

No, you get a total mess at the micro level.

Please tell me, which boys/girls are going to get bumped down or up? How do they choose?

Then factor in such economic status.

Then factor in previous grades of that school.

Shur why did teachers bother with predicting grades at all then. Just submit a class ranking only and let the department assign the grades. It will still tally with previous years won't it?

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

Don't know the figures but Dept of Ed obviously do. They can definitively & scientifically state that X% of boys get this result and Y% of girls get this result. They can base it on averages over multiple years.

They will then weight the predicted grades so that these percentages are maintained. It's not an outrageous move. They will also be weighting on other factors to ensure that these predicted results are in line with previous years.

It's the best way to deal with a not ideal situation.

Across 100% of schools or just some?

Dravokivich

Is this the affect of participation awards? If any sort of bonus is to be applied to a selection of students, it suggests they wouldn't have been able to achieve better themselves. So what else is going to be done to encourage students who would sit the LCA (or whatever it's called now if the name has changed)?

TheValeyard wrote: »

For the Leaving Cert you were a number. This is going to be a minefield. Location , social status, gender should not play a role in grading.

Who is number 1? :P

Jane98

JasonStatham wrote: »

I agree with this. Government / teacher cop out. What a surprise in backward Ireland.

Nothing to do with the teachers. The government decided on calculated grades without consulting the teachers and no teacher I know would have voted for calculated grades.

TheValeyard

Dravokivich wrote: »

Who is number 1? :P

KaneToad

lawred2 wrote: »

Stopped reading at the macro level.

Sure why bother with exams at all then.

Why did you stop reading? Did you not understand ?

We usually "bother" with exams. This year it wasn't done - due to the pandemic. The predicted grades and subsequent weightings is an imperfect solution to the problem.

In the absence of the exams actually being sat - what would your solution be?

Treppen

JasonStatham wrote: »

I agree with this. Government / teacher cop out. What a surprise in backward Ireland.

No way was it a teacher cop out, get your history straight. This was decided after Dr Kelly and Joe Duffy bleating on about uncertainty and stressed students etc.. She was calling for all students to apply for UK Colleges so that teachers here would be forced to provide a predicted grade FFS. The following Monday the department rolled back on the 'by hook or by crook' promise.

Nothing to do with teachers.

They are fundamentally opposed to assessing their own students for state certification and not happy with predicted grades for obvious reasons which are becoming apparent to the general public now.

Exam should have been run. You won't find many teachers thinking otherwise.

Scuid Mhór

TheValeyard wrote: »

For the Leaving Cert you were a number. This is going to be a minefield. Location , social status, gender should not play a role in grading.

... except that this is how the LC has always worked? Why else is it always the south side private schools that get the highest points on average? People are upset by a system of predicted grades trying to keep the status quo, it’s ridiculous.

KaneToad

Treppen wrote: »

Just submit a class ranking only and let the department assign the grades. It will still tally with previous years won't it?

It will. This would also be an imperfect solution.

KaneToad

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

... except that this is how the LC has always worked? Why else is it always the south side private schools that get the highest points on average? People are upset by a system of predicted grades trying to keep the status quo, it’s ridiculous.

The LC exam is the least unfair method of assessment. But that's not saying much. There are huge educational inequalities - mainly socio-economic.

Dravokivich

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

... except that this is how the LC has always worked? Why else is it always the south side private schools that get the highest points on average? People are upset by a system of predicted grades trying to keep the status quo, it’s ridiculous.

It's not just the private schools those rich kids are going through. A lot of them will get extra tuition outside of school too. But, that's not really the where the problem lays. You can have poorer students excel and get exceptionally good grades, insert this bias, and it can reduce their grades, to maintain overall averages.

titan18

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

... except that this is how the LC has always worked? Why else is it always the south side private schools that get the highest points on average? People are upset by a system of predicted grades trying to keep the status quo, it’s ridiculous.

It hasn't though. The corrector has no idea who's paper he's marking, or from what school they are. It's just an exam number, and you can probably give a good guess due to writing style for girls and boys. Other than that, it's completely blind.

Now, you'll get cases where teachers submit marks for the students, and grading method means those are going up and down based on gender, school they came from etc to fit the historical trends. So males will get downward graded, females will get upwards graded, poor schools will get downward graded and rich school gets upward graded.

Works at an overall level, but fecks it up at an individual level

osarusan

I imagine that the Dept of Education can see that exam results are actually fairly predictable in terms of schools and socio-ecomnomic areas - the same schools getting much the results year after year - and are factoring this into their grading, so that their overall results will match those of previously years as much as possible.

It's the outliers who will either suffer (an unusually good student in a school with traditionally poor results) or benefit (an unusually poor student in a school with traditionally good results).

Dravokivich

TheValeyard wrote: »

Hehe, I was going along the lines of, I'm not a number...

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

It will. This would also be an imperfect solution.

I know, I'm just showing how pointless the exercise of teachers providing grades and then the department saying "no you are wrong, we know better about each individual student than you do".

A better solution would be to let the teacher grades fall where they may and let CAO lottery to sort the rest out.

Applying gender and socio economic quotas is a political decision.

Are they going to adjust for mixed and single sex schools, females and males perform differently there too.

How about ethnic minorities?

Gaelscoileanna?

Students with a disability?

Students of a particular faith?

No problem making that tally with previous years either!

MarkR

This doesn't seem fair or workable. Few examples, to be the devils advocate.

1. Boy who was downgraded not happy with his result, gets rechecked. Is there some notation on the exam to say he was downgraded? Will he be graded only on his work now?
2. Should all boys ask for a recheck if they didn't do as well as expected?
3. If a student currently presents as male, but could be trans, do they have reason to appeal?

I think that more women and girls should go into stem courses. I just don't think we should cook the books to do it.

shesty

The best thing the LC has going for it is it's anonymity.
We should probably remember that (as should the media) the next time they start up about League tables, and other ways to assess students. It is far from perfect, but anonymity should be preserved in it.

Francie Barrett

No matter what the department of education do, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people.

The real issue is that the exams should never have been cancelled.

RandomName2

Coybig_ wrote: »

Absolutely disgraceful really. To intentionally weight results so that girls perform better is blatant discrimination.

I'd usually agree in relation to gender based bias, but the aim is

"to arrive at the grade each student would have achieved if the Leaving Certificate examinations had taken place as normal.

Students' expected performance in a subject and level is combined with information about how students in the school have fared in this subject in recent years, and with their performance at Junior Cycle."

Emphasis mine.

Girls doing better is what is statistically likely to have happened, so that's what's being reflected here, along with all of the other criteria.

It's not an ideal system. Any decision made about it is not going to be perfect.

Hopefully though it will be a once-off.

RandomName2

Francie Barrett wrote: »

The real issue is that the exams should never have been cancelled.

The issue is that in May/early June we were at the height of the lockdown. We were earnestly giving the lockdown a shot. Naturally the lockdown should have taken place in February or March instead of April/May, but all of Europe was culpable in their slow response to the potential pandemic (ultimately their response proving a bit too late).

Given that we were giving the lockdown the best shot, having thousands of people for hours in exam halls over the period of three weeks was not the best idea (particularly when nobody would skip an exam, no matter how unwell).

Rescheduling the exams for mid July would in theory be possible, but managing all corrections and the entire college application process within the span of just August would have been unrealistic.

Treppen

MarkR wrote: »

This doesn't seem fair or workable. Few examples, to be the devils advocate.

1. Boy who was downgraded not happy with his result, gets rechecked. Is there some notation on the exam to say he was downgraded? Will he be graded only on his work now?
2. Should all boys ask for a recheck if they didn't do as well as expected?
3. If a student currently presents as male, but could be trans, do they have reason to appeal?

I think that more women and girls should go into stem courses. I just don't think we should cook the books to do it.

It's just the process that can be appealed, within that process the Department will maintain that their algorithm of bumping up and down is sacrosanct and thus won't factor into the appeal.

Only thing is if a student takes a legal case and is able to expose a 9 grounds discrimination being applied to them by the department. As is the track history with the department they will drag it out for as long as possible to avoid any precedent/flood gates. By which time the November exam will have happened, it would have been necessary for the student to sit that to further prove their case, either way they'll be waiting for college in September 2021 with 2 opportunities to sit a Leaving Cert!

MrMusician18

RandomName2 wrote: »

I'd usually agree in relation to gender based bias, but the aim is



Emphasis mine.

Girls doing better is what is statistically likely to have happened, so that's what's being reflected here, along with all of the other criteria.

It's not an ideal system. Any decision made about it is not going to be perfect.

Hopefully though it will be a once-off.

It should have been a never-off. There was absolutely no reason that the exams couldn't have been run. It was a complete cop-out, caving to pressure from a couple of squeeky wheels. Remember the BS about mental health?

The dept deserves all the criticism it gets. The brains behind this experiment should never be given a hearing again.

Dravokivich

RandomName2 wrote: »

I'd usually agree in relation to gender based bias, but the aim is



Emphasis mine.

Girls doing better is what is statistically likely to have happened, so that's what's being reflected here, along with all of the other criteria.

It's not an ideal system. Any decision made about it is not going to be perfect.

Hopefully though it will be a once-off.

I'd expect that to be reflected in the predicted grades prior to manipulation. Are we going to see how the variance actually applies? If something like this is going to be done, it begs the question, is a student going to receive predicted grade and amended predicted grade?

KaneToad

Treppen wrote: »

I know, I'm just showing how pointless the exercise of teachers providing grades and then the department saying "no you are wrong, we know better about each individual student than you do".

A better solution would be to let the teacher grades fall where they may and let CAO lottery to sort the rest out.

Applying gender and socio economic quotas is a political decision.

Are they going to adjust for mixed and single sex schools, females and males perform differently there too.

How about ethnic minorities?

Gaelscoileanna?

Students with a disability?

Students of a particular faith?

No problem making that tally with previous years either!

You could indeed adjust for all of the above. You could adjust based on day of the week the candidate was born on too, if the inclination was there.

I have no idea what the dept is adjusting for. I can be certain though that it's not going to be a fair outcome for everyone. But, in the absence of the exams being sat, it's one of the least unfair scenarios.

lawred2

RandomName2 wrote: »

The issue is that in May/early June we were at the height of the lockdown. We were earnestly giving the lockdown a shot. Naturally the lockdown should have taken place in February or March instead of April/May, but all of Europe was culpable in their slow response to the potential pandemic (ultimately their response proving a bit too late).

Given that we were giving the lockdown the best shot, having thousands of people for hours in exam halls over the period of three weeks was not the best idea (particularly when nobody would skip an exam, no matter how unwell).

Rescheduling the exams for mid July would in theory be possible, but managing all corrections and the entire college application process within the span of just August would have been unrealistic.

why need that have been a restriction?

Most colleges could easily have deferred start to October.

In fact some already don't start until October as it is.

Treppen

RandomName2 wrote: »

I'd usually agree in relation to gender based bias, but the aim is



Girls doing better is what is statistically likely to have happened, so that's what's being reflected here, along with all of the other criteria.

It's not an ideal system. Any decision made about it is not going to be perfect.

Hopefully though it will be a once-off.

First off... Working on a small level within a class of 25 is generally ok. Any of the teachers I talk to say that they were pretty much in line with previous years.

"to arrive at the grade each student would have achieved if the Leaving Certificate examinations had taken place as normal.

Students' expected performance in a subject and level is combined with information about how students in the school have fared in this subject in recent years, and with their performance at Junior Cycle."

That's all kind of manageable as it's kept within that cohort.

But to apply the sledgehammer of gender and socio economic from the top down and tweek all/some results across the board is random.

Who gets bumped who gets left alone? Who cares because our curve is the same as last year.

Treppen

KaneToad wrote: »

You could indeed adjust for all of the above. You could adjust based on day of the week the candidate was born on too, if the inclination was there.

I have no idea what the dept is adjusting for. I can be certain though that it's not going to be a fair outcome for everyone. But, in the absence of the exams being sat, it's one of the least unfair scenarios.

It's in the title

Girls to do better than boys in ‘calculated grade’ Leaving Cert exams as gender trends will be built into results

I agree , in the absence of exams it's least unfair for predicted and ' calculated ' grades.

BUT calculating in gender and socio economic status just so the overall curve looks good will make it even more likely that grades are going to be adjusted AWAY from what the teacher initially provided. Namely because the adjusting of these extra new factors HAS to be random and indiscriminate. More students will get hit with the hammer.

RandomName2

lawred2 wrote: »

Most colleges could easily have deferred start to October.

In fact some already don't start until October as it is.

They would have had to change all of their syllabuses, for all of their courses.

Each course, in every university, is set to run over a specific period, and consequently cover particular material. Reducing the term by 2-3 weeks would entail a large amount of effort to correct the system. Pushing the end of term back by that amount would not really be practical due to the natural book stop that is posed by Christmas. I suppose end of semester exams could be moved into January.. but then people would complain that evens planned for January would be disrupted.

But, yes, I'd say that that might have been a better solution. Concern about undoing the good work of the lockdown, combined with likely complaints from teachers, students, and universities, meant that the government took what looked to them like the easier option.

Treppen

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'd expect that to be reflected in the predicted grades prior to manipulation. Are we going to see how the variance actually applies? If something like this is going to be done, it begs the question, is a student going to receive predicted grade and amended predicted grade?

My thoughts exactly.
If the teacher is keeping in line with previous grades and school performance, and the department is taking this year's students JC results into account then ...ceteris paribus.

Now ... If a teacher is acting the maggot and bumps up grades wildly, will the department applying a gender influencer across the whole cohort take care of this one class?

crossman47

osarusan wrote: »

I imagine that the Dept of Education can see that exam results are actually fairly predictable in terms of schools and socio-ecomnomic areas - the same schools getting much the results year after year - and are factoring this into their grading, so that their overall results will match those of previously years as much as possible.

It's the outliers who will either suffer (an unusually good student in a school with traditionally poor results) or benefit (an unusually poor student in a school with traditionally good results).

Thats exactly it. The Indo story is a non story. It would be a story if boys did as well as girls this time because they never do.

Ficheall

"crossman47 wrote:

It would be a story if boys did as well as girls this time because they never do.

You could say that about the wealthy/poor schools' performance too, but it was quite a big story in the UK.

Treppen

crossman47 wrote: »

Thats exactly it. The Indo story is a non story. It would be a story if boys did as well as girls this time because they never do.

Actually they do!

Boys, by contrast, performed better in subjects such as maths, applied maths and chemistry.

www.irishtimes.com/news/education/girls-outperform-boys-in-most-leaving-cert-subjects-at-higher-level-1.3986415%3fmode=amp

crossman47

Treppen wrote: »

My thoughts exactly.
If the teacher is keeping in line with previous grades and school performance, and the department is taking this year's students JC results into account then ...ceteris paribus.

Now ... If a teacher is acting the maggot and bumps up grades wildly, will the department applying a gender influencer across the whole cohort take care of this one class?

I don't think teachers acted the maggot but, human nature being what it is, the grades this time will be higher than normal. Thats why they are being adjusted - to bring them into line with previous years. Maybe they'd be as well forgetting about that and let this years grades stand alone, higher than any other year before or after, but comparable for this year.

Ficheall

Treppen wrote: »

Actually they do!
www.irishtimes.com/news/education/girls-outperform-boys-in-most-leaving-cert-subjects-at-higher-level-1.3986415%3fmode=amp

If they factor that in, people will really lose their ****..

crossman47

Ficheall wrote: »

You could say that about the wealthy/poor schools' performance too, but it was quite a big story in the UK.

Of course it was a story. Pupils saw their assessed score and then saw they got less.

crossman47

Treppen wrote: »

Actually they do!



www.irishtimes.com/news/education/girls-outperform-boys-in-most-leaving-cert-subjects-at-higher-level-1.3986415%3fmode=amp

And if it works correctly this time, boys will still do better in maths.

antimatterx

If I had to accept my predicted grades, I would have been ****ed. I did so poor in my class tests all throughout school, and my mocks I got <100 points. My LC was an anomaly amongst my past performance, but I knuckled down after my mocks so I could get my course.