The way forward for LC2021

Random sample

rainbowtrout wrote: »

They're looking at the outcome of last year:

• Grades were massively inflated and remained so even after adjustment
• 80% of grades were not downgraded after moderation
• Opportunity to get at least what they think they are worth or better without sitting the exam.

Are we going to have permanent grade inflation so? Why should the class of 22 have to sit a leaving cert if we have had two years of inflated guess grades?

PoolDude

I guess it depends on whether there is ‘choice’ or not in the final options.

If there is then it’s whether it’s blind choice or informed choice for those students. I can see another outcry from students & opposition parties if it’s not the later and can see how it’s going to be very difficult for teachers and the DES to meet a timeline to give informed choice (PG results before start of June).

There’s a way to go on this one yet I suspect

am_zarathustra

I think they will hold off til the high court judgement, if that shines a light on what went on maybe people will see the wisdom in some form of exam.

Otherwise inflation will be mad, I won't have the data and given a varience of say 10% around a grade for each student this year where it would have been maybe 5% last year (maybe less in one of my subjects) I'll have to award up. Most teachers will do this this year. That will absolutely lead to more downgrades this year to even just keep it in line with last year's inflation.

If the kids don't have the standardized PGs and the exams go ahead in June would you be recommending all your students sit the exams?

rainbowtrout

am_zarathustra wrote: »

They have to do them separately really. It's a mess, particular students will sit exams particular students will want the predictive. If standardising they would have to be done separately, as in bell curve them all. PG for everyone, bell curve that. Let those who want to take that grade, take it. The exams are then sat and standardized as normal. I wouldnt be sure but my guess is a lot of students will need to be downgraded in PG, the exam might be a safer bet in the end, at least your own ability or work ethic will be the only reason your grade is changed, not a random program doing God knows what!

I only read the press release on the grades from when they were released 2 weeks ago, today.

It makes for interesting reading in terms of statistics.

The number of students who sat the winter LC in each subject is listed.

The top 10 subjects in number of students who sat them were:

The first column shows the number of people who sat the exam in Winter 2020. The second column shows the number of people who sat that subject in 2019, which I'm using as a rough estimate for total number of 2020 candidates.


Biology 837 34000 2.46%
Maths 718 55000 1.31%
Chemistry 424 9500 4.46%
English 380 54500 0.70%
Irish 275 48000 0.57%
French 264 23500 1.12%
Business 216 17300 1.25%
Geography 201 24000 0.84%
Physics 188 7800 2.41%
Ag Science 142 7700 1.84%





The sciences are way over represented in the table given the numbers that sit them. But aside from Ag Science which has a project, the other three (and maths) are 100% factual exams, with no subjectivity.

So I think it will largely depend on what format any sort of predicted grading will take and how project components/orals etc will be marked/assessed this year. Written exams favour factual subjects without project components

If I was a C student in English, I'd gladly take a C/H4 as a predicted grade, which given that it's a middle of the road grade so far less likely to be downgraded than learn a vast amount of poetry and prose and drama, and concentrate on the factual stuff I know I can get right with enough practice.

rainbowtrout

jayo76 wrote: »

The guidance counsellor came in to our staffroom the day after results were available last September to announce that huge numbers of last years 6th years were very upset, shocked at what teachers had given them as calculated grades. I understand it, I do as I outlined above so I listened politely until she mentioned two particular students. Both had failed multiple subjects in the mocks and generally done little to no work over the two years. They failed no subject in the calculated grades but here was the Counsellor announcing they should have done much better and had been on to her to make this clear.

That counsellor needs a good kick if they thought it was professional or appropriate to come in and berate teachers who were given an impossible task and by the sounds of it gave those students the benefit of the doubt.

noplacehere

I think there really is a fundamental misunderstanding among the general public, parents and students as to the difference between formative assessments and class tests versus summative assessments. I don’t know how this is explained but it is fundamental and I don’t know how it gets overcome

Studies in the uk showed only about 50% of predictions were accurate with like 40% over predicted as far as I remember. We are going to be even less accurate particularly after last years fiasco. So unless the department are going to whole sale downgrade half the predications then these predications based on just one or two summative assessments (Christmas test fifth year and sixth year/mocks at Christmas in most schools) are going to be far more generous. Without massive downgrades those results will not be comparable with a normal SEC paper without massive adjustments to the bell curve. And if the department do downgrade students then there will be outcry that they did.

This is a total mess

rainbowtrout

Random sample wrote: »

Are we going to have permanent grade inflation so? Why should the class of 22 have to sit a leaving cert if we have had two years of inflated guess grades?

No I would say not. I would hope 2022 would bring a return to normal or as close to normal as possible. I'd say it'll be more a case of 'get this crowd out the door in whatever way possible and get most of them into college'.

deiseindublin

I don't know how two different bell curves can work? Do you make CG fit the bell curve, and the do same for those sitting exams? Honestly, it'll be a mess.

@Random sample - as much as I don't agree with or want a free pass for any cohort of students, I don't agree with your line on class of 22. LC20 and LC21 haven't chosen this option. A world pandemic and a badly prepared DES have foisted it upon them. Whatever solution of sorts that is announced might not be equitable with LC19 or LC22, depending on how long this goes on, but we are where we are, and a solution, however unequitable has to be found.

Lots of LCs would prefer to have had exams, along with a full year in school, 20k less CAO applicants, and next to no CAO points inflation - not to mention the sheer unpredictability of how they'll fare in CGs.

I really don't think it's any walk in the park for them, and the LC living here sure as hell wouldn't pick it.

History Queen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No I would say not. I would hope 2022 would bring a return to normal or as close to normal as possible. I'd say it'll be more a case of 'get this crowd out the door in whatever way possible and get most of them into college'.

Look up the #LC2022 on twitter, there's already calls not to forget about them.

rainbowtrout

noplacehere wrote: »

I think there really is a fundamental misunderstanding among the general public, parents and students as to the difference between formative assessments and class tests versus summative assessments. I don’t know how this is explained but it is fundamental and I don’t know how it gets overcome

Studies in the uk showed only about 50% of predictions were accurate with like 40% over predicted as far as I remember. We are going to be even less accurate particularly after last years fiasco. So unless the department are going to whole sale downgrade half the predications then these predications based on just one or two summative assessments (Christmas test fifth year and sixth year/mocks at Christmas in most schools) are going to be far more generous. Without massive downgrades those results will not be comparable with a normal SEC paper without massive adjustments to the bell curve. And if the department do downgrade students then there will be outcry that they did.

This is a total mess

Well if you were to take some of the comments on The Journal :rolleyes: as a representation of what the public currently think, many of the public think that the ASTI are causing ructions because they want teachers to get paid for supervision and marking in the summer and predicted grades will take away this source of income. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

If that's what we are dealing with, I don't hold out much hope for people understand the finer details of assessment.

rainbowtrout

How about this for a solution. Let the teachers make predicted grades for each and every student. Mark them out of 100 like last year. Have the students sit the exams. If the students score higher on the written exam obviously they keep that grade. If the predicted grade is higher by 5% then they can be awarded the predicted grade, if it is in a higher grade band. Anything else prediction wise is just pie in the sky.

rainbowtrout

History Queen wrote: »

Look up the #LC2022 on twitter, there's already calls not to forget about them.

noplacehere

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Totally off topic but I have JUST discovered Derry girls and binge watched the first two seasons in the last two weeks. It was AMAZING and I now totally understand this gif

History Queen

noplacehere wrote: »

Totally off topic but I have JUST discovered Derry girls and binge watched the first two seasons in the last two weeks. It was AMAZING and I now totally understand this gif

:pac::pac: :pac:

Also @rainbowtrout, my sentiments exactly! Now there's not a lot of them to be fair, but that's how it starts.

am_zarathustra

deiseindublin wrote: »

I don't know how two different bell curves can work? Do you make CG fit the bell curve, and the do same for those sitting exams? Honestly, it'll be a mess.

@Random sample - as much as I don't agree with or want a free pass for any cohort of students, I don't agree with your line on class of 22. LC20 and LC21 haven't chosen this option. A world pandemic and a badly prepared DES have foisted it upon them. Whatever solution of sorts that is announced might not be equitable with LC19 or LC22, depending on how long this goes on, but we are where we are, and a solution, however unequitable has to be found.

Lots of LCs would prefer to have had exams, along with a full year in school, 20k less CAO applicants, and next to no CAO points inflation - not to mention the sheer unpredictability of how they'll fare in CGs.

I really don't think it's any walk in the park for them, and the LC living here sure as hell wouldn't pick it.

That's what they did last year, they used a "standardising formula" to hit a standard curve until it looked mostly reasonable, with a little inflation and that's was fine. And it was they do for the exams every year normally. The issue if everyone doesn't sit the exams or get predictive grades is these curves could be off but will still need to be applied or grades go insane. We had 5 revsisions of the marking scheme the last time I corrected the LC before we got the curve.

My issue would be that if the downgrading is random, and it pretty much was late year from what I could see, then it's a risk not to take the exam if it's offered and you don't have your final PG then you are risking a downgrade, and there will be more this year, if they've any intention of not letting the points run away with themselves

deiseindublin

Yeah, I correct every year so know how tricky the bell curve can be.

Impossible to 'bell' CGs though. CGs aren't as reliable as the hard copy of a written exam that can be scrutinised to check that the MS was fairly applied. You have hard line markers, and just so markers, and give 'em all a H1 markers. Honestly, it's a mess.

I really HATE the idea of CG, as both a parent and as a teacher. No winners imo. I'd rather get what I'm due than take a chance on the system being fair, generous or downright unfair. After 2 years of hard graft, your result should be a lot more scientific.

r93kaey5p2izun

How would a small group choosing to sit exams be fit to the bell curve? It's unlikely a group choosing exams is representative of a normal population so the curve would be skewed in reality. Like, if its almost all high fliers who have legitimate expectation of a H1 who choose an exam, how could they allow for that?

am_zarathustra

That's the problem, last year they were standardising a single group, this year it may be two groups with an overlap if the media is to be believed or a set and a subset.

So student A is given a CG of 73% way too many H3s so downgraded are needed. After the high court ruling there may be even more issues with this but for now assume it's some gross calculation based on a national curve depending on JC predictions (and maybe schools history, remains to be seen) student A is unlucky. They get hit with a downgrade. They didn't sign up to sit the exams H4 it is

Student B, same situation as before but signed up for the exam and sat it. Got their 73% and get the grade. Or sat and got H4 and nothing changed, or H5 and still got to keep their downgraded H4.

Why wouldn't you sit the exam? It's worth a shot. Maybe a few looking for very high points or with a subject they really hate might drop one or two and opt for CG but it's not like they have anything else to do.

Without the "calculated" grade in front of them or a clear indication of weighting of factors I can't see how I could tell a student not to sit the exam to be honest. It could always go your way on the day. I did a question worth a quarter of a HL paper with a couple of students the day before a LC exam a few years ago, same diagram, same format, same numbers........the same question, a difficult one at that. All those kids went up a grades because they stayed behind after another exam to go through stuff with me. Exams can fall so many ways, it's worth a shot if there's no penalty surely

Obviously ignoring the 10% who don't want to be there at all

r93kaey5p2izun

How did they standardise the few sitting in November? What statistical process was applied? It can't have been the normal curve surely? I think it's ok in theory to apply the bell curve to predicted grades as a whole, the issue being how the individuals moved up or down are chosen. But I cannot see how the curve could apply to a small cohort who opted to sit an exam.

Wombatman

Nyla Worried Son wrote: »

How did they standardise the few sitting in November? What statistical process was applied? It can't have been the normal curve surely? I think it's ok in theory to apply the bell curve to predicted grades as a whole, the issue being how the individuals moved up or down are chosen. But I cannot see how the curve could apply to a small cohort who opted to sit an exam.

Yeah. In theory a successful PG standardisation model should be able to adjust grade inflation downward in line with grade distributions of previous years. Even if standardisation isn't successful in adjusting, CAO points will just rise to match the new point level.

The real problem is the edge cases that the standardisation model misrepresents, like an average student who is brilliant at one subject or a student who has progressed remarkably in a short space of time.

rainbowtrout

Nyla Worried Son wrote: »

How would a small group choosing to sit exams be fit to the bell curve? It's unlikely a group choosing exams is representative of a normal population so the curve would be skewed in reality. Like, if its almost all high fliers who have legitimate expectation of a H1 who choose an exam, how could they allow for that?

Looking at the stats I posted earlier that's quite likely, the number of students who sat chemistry is way out of whack with the rest of the subjects. 474 sat chemistry in November, 380 sat English. Typically 9500 take Chemistry each year, where 55k take English. I'd take a wild guess that quite a lot of those were going for high points courses like Medicine, Veterinary, Dentistry etc and banked on Chemistry being a course they could pull up a grade in.

Wombatman

am_zarathustra wrote: »

Why wouldn't you sit the exam? It's worth a shot. Maybe a few looking for very high points or with a subject they really hate might drop one or two and opt for CG but it's not like they have anything else to do.

The only reason the majority of students wouldn't sit exams, is if they have already received their PGs, and feel they have more than enough points for their CAO choices.

The department wants to swerve the difficulty and risk (might be another lockdown) of hosting large scale exams in a Covid world. They want reduced sittings to save on hosting and marking. This is why I believe that PG results will be awarded before students have to elect to sit exams.

Without knowledge of PG results before sitting exams, students would be beyond crazy not to sit exams in all their subjects. No matter how badly they are prepared, with PGs as a safety net, they have nothing to lose. I can't see DES wanting this. This is why they were promoting PGs and relegating exams, which lead the ASTI to walk, last week.

am_zarathustra

Do you think part of the walking was down to pushing the exams again? If LC is in June the kids will not have the grades so most will sit the exams and then it's all a bit self defeating.......but it'll be obvious which kids deserved what grades and which teachers over/under predicted (and I use the word lightly)

I'm not sure, timeline wise, both can happen by June, maybe that's the sticking point for the ASTI. And if calculated grades do start even earlier than last year foni cut contact with kids. That's going to be another sticking point.

There are so many more issues with this than last year.

am_zarathustra

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Looking at the stats I posted earlier that's quite likely, the number of students who sat chemistry is way out of whack with the rest of the subjects. 474 sat chemistry in November, 380 sat English. Typically 9500 take Chemistry each year, where 55k take English. I'd take a wild guess that quite a lot of those were going for high points courses like Medicine, Veterinary, Dentistry etc and banked on Chemistry being a course they could pull up a grade in.

Actually the breakdown of grades is on examinations.ie

24% of students who sat the winter biology paper got a H1. Clearly it was worth their while given that all of them had to be upgrades.


Actually I just did another calculation. By their nature all H1/O1 grades achieved in the winter LC were upgrades as no one would have sat an exam that already had a Grade 1. Going by the spreadsheet, across all subjects (and levels) there were 571 grade 1s. There were 4698 grades awarded in total across all subjects and levels. So Grade 1s account for 12% of all grades awarded. I think the reports in the media said that 40% of grades were upgrades, which is about 1879 grades overall. So those H1s/O1s are a significant portion of that. 30% to be exact.

As predicted a lot of students sitting that exam were medicine/vet/physio bound. Harsh again for this year's and next year's points race, it's such a bad system

rainbowtrout

am_zarathustra wrote: »

As predicted a lot of students sitting that exam were medicine/vet/physio bound. Harsh again for this year's and next year's points race, it's such a bad system

Ya, Chemistry being such an outlier there certainly points that way.

Morris Garren

Having listened to the news yesterday I think I heard the reporter say that the ISSU are also involved in the current LC negotiations. If I understand that literally, does it mean that some Leaving Cert students are actually sitting in Government Buildings around a table with the other stakeholders? All the stress of the current situation would make double jobbing like that really challenging I would presume. Or are they involved at some remote level?

Wanderer78

Morris Garren wrote:

Having listened to the news yesterday I think I heard the reporter say that the ISSU are also involved in the current LC negotiations. If I understand that literally, does it mean that some Leaving Cert students are actually sitting in Government Buildings around a table with the other stakeholders? All the stress of the current situation would make double jobbing like that really challenging I would presume. Or are they involved at some remote level?

Fair play to them if they are, it's their futures, what do us adults know about what they want

km79

Morris Garren wrote: »

Having listened to the news yesterday I think I heard the reporter say that the ISSU are also involved in the current LC negotiations. If I understand that literally, does it mean that some Leaving Cert students are actually sitting in Government Buildings around a table with the other stakeholders? All the stress of the current situation would make double jobbing like that really challenging I would presume. Or are they involved at some remote level?

I would assume all parties except the Minister are not in the buildings. They meet remotely

shesty

Morris Garren wrote: »

Having listened to the news yesterday I think I heard the reporter say that the ISSU are also involved in the current LC negotiations. If I understand that literally, does it mean that some Leaving Cert students are actually sitting in Government Buildings around a table with the other stakeholders? All the stress of the current situation would make double jobbing like that really challenging I would presume. Or are they involved at some remote level?

They might just be getting updates for comment, either.

Random sample

Such absolute rubbish here from Brian Mooney. https://www.newstalk.com/news/convincing-teachers-to-sign-up-for-leaving-cert-duties-this-summer-will-be-a-huge-problem-1151033?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3hQtDoH_QPNH2SaN2q2ZdMAiAmoNBgSMhs1cLwSp1xXUCAwLZ6htImlkk#Echobox=1613464969 Why not advertise for examiners and bleat about teachers being unwilling to do the work if they can’t be found?

As for the weekly tests and body of work.... I didn’t have time for weekly tests, I was preparing my students for a leaving cert.