The way forward for LC2021

Wombatman

What does subject to final agreement mean?

Wombatman

Letter to Second Level Principals.

Mardy Bum

Wombatman wrote: »

What does subject to final agreement mean?

I'd say it hadn't been agreed by unions. Shock horror!

Rosita

Nyla Worried Son wrote: »

Personally I don't think it's acceptable for JMB to issue any such instruction unless it is an official SEC/DES decision applying to every school.

But the Mocks are an unofficial undertaking by individual schools. Some don't do them. Others correct their own. The SEC/DES is never going to issue a blanket instruction regarding Mocks which are provided by a private company. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the JMB's thinking but I think they are entitled to make the call.

Icsics

Rosita wrote: »

But the Mocks are an unofficial undertaking by individual schools. Some don't do them. Others correct their own. The SEC/DES is never going to issue a blanket instruction regarding Mocks which are provided by a private company. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the JMB's thinking but I think they are entitled to make the call.

But are they? Where’s the teachers voice in all of this? Make no mistake JMB are not our friends, they are a quasi union for management

Rosita

Icsics wrote: »

But are they? Where’s the teachers voice in all of this? Make no mistake JMB are not our friends, they are a quasi union for management

I don't really see the teachers' voice anywhere. I've seen many education discussions on TV, heard on Radio, and read in newspapers. The one thing all commentators have in common is that they don't work in a classroom. It's a fair question but it's such established reality now that it hardly seem relevant to ask unfortunately.

Panga

Having just read the DES letter on the Leaving Cert do I understand this correctly:

Oral exams to be run in school by teachers who have not been trained to run oral exams
These exams take place during Easter holidays
Teachers give up their holidays to work for free
Teachers examine students in their own school, there is no detail yet but I expect we'll be told to give them a provisional grade and the SEC will give a final grade.
There is no mention of mask wearing so I'm assuming students take off their mask for the exam putting teachers at greater risk

It's clear from the fact that the DES didn't recruit oral examiners this year that they had no intention of running these exams. The unions insisted on them, which I agree with, so the DES agreed to them them but managed to get the unions to agree to teachers working for free and putting themselves at greater risk. The DES should be facilitating this important element of the LC language exam.

The fact that teachers will have no training completely undermines the integrity of the exam.

noplacehere

Icsics wrote: »

But are they? Where’s the teachers voice in all of this? Make no mistake JMB are not our friends, they are a quasi union for management

Is there any way to confirm that the JMB are saying to cancel mocks?

r93kaey5p2izun

Rosita wrote: »

But the Mocks are an unofficial undertaking by individual schools. Some don't do them. Others correct their own. The SEC/DES is never going to issue a blanket instruction regarding Mocks which are provided by a private company. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the JMB's thinking but I think they are entitled to make the call.

Yes, I know mocks are an unofficial undertaking. But DES did issue a blanket instruction on mocks last year - you can use them, just don't give them undue weighting. Personally I don't think it should be acceptable for a management body to dictate to teachers how they carry out teaching, learning and assessment, without consultation, and without notice.

r93kaey5p2izun

noplacehere wrote: »

Is there any way to confirm that the JMB are saying to cancel mocks?

Surely, even if saying not to use them for grading, they are not saying to cancel them! That's hardly fair for students who want to sit the exam and had expected to do mocks as normal preparation.

Icsics

noplacehere wrote: »

Is there any way to confirm that the JMB are saying to cancel mocks?

No, they’re not saying cancel them just that they cannot be used for ACs

am_zarathustra

Icsics wrote: »

No, they’re not saying cancel them just that they cannot be used for ACs

How can they say that when the department haven't issued guidelines. If this is true, and given there is no documentation it's only heresay now, they are very much jumping the gun and outside of their remit. The SEC are involved, I'm happy to ignore everyone else based on every interaction I've had in education

jayo76

am_zarathustra wrote: »

How can they say that when the department haven't issued guidelines. If this is true, and given there is no documentation it's only heresay now, they are very much jumping the gun and outside of their remit. The SEC are involved, I'm happy to ignore everyone else based on every interaction I've had in education

We had a staff meeting today, the principal read a document to us which stated that "a limited amount of testing may take place up until May 14th but that Mocks Data must not be used in the process of coming to your assessed grade". Is this the official DES position now? The Principal when asked, said that this had been communication from the JMB as opposed to official Department Communication as of yet.

km79

That’s a lot of guidance to follow ........

am_zarathustra

What's the principal doing reading out advice like that when the department/SEC have not issued guidelines. The JMB would want to colour inside their own lines if they've sent stuff like this out. Maybe it's the principal justifying not running them? Seems mad to me though.

Bobtheman

Be cautious. The department might down grade your accredited grade. They are a department of flip flops.
I have heard anybody doing orals will be paid to say otherwise is Farcical. Sure who would do it?
As for the JC I'm not getting bogged down in long calculations. I know who the honours are now.
As for the LC same. It's all farcical and I'm going to inflate because you can bet the department will flip flop.
Thus let them deflate my grades
Because my guess is just a guess and to dress it up as anything else is a joke

acequion

Panga wrote: »

Having just read the DES letter on the Leaving Cert do I understand this correctly:

Oral exams to be run in school by teachers who have not been trained to run oral exams
These exams take place during Easter holidays
Teachers give up their holidays to work for free
Teachers examine students in their own school, there is no detail yet but I expect we'll be told to give them a provisional grade and the SEC will give a final grade.
There is no mention of mask wearing so I'm assuming students take off their mask for the exam putting teachers at greater risk

It's clear from the fact that the DES didn't recruit oral examiners this year that they had no intention of running these exams. The unions insisted on them, which I agree with, so the DES agreed to them them but managed to get the unions to agree to teachers working for free and putting themselves at greater risk. The DES should be facilitating this important element of the LC language exam.

The fact that teachers will have no training completely undermines the integrity of the exam.

I can't see how something like that can be forced through unless all the language teachers in the country are utter eejits.

Firstly it's Easter holidays, secondly it's not during tuition time. Therefore after hours. No worker can be forced to work after hours. I'm a French teacher and I've an LC group this year and no way am I playing ball with that nonsense.

I'd be very surprised as well if the unions agreed to it and would urge everyone to get on to their union.

I would imagine this is one element of the overall plan that will tweak and morph into something more workable. It may still be at Easter and after hours but probably on a voluntary and paid basis.

wirelessdude01

acequion wrote: »

I can't see how something like that can be forced through unless all the language teachers in the country are utter eejits.

Firstly it's Easter holidays, secondly it's not during tuition time. Therefore after hours. No worker can be forced to work after hours. I'm a French teacher and I've an LC group this year and no way am I playing ball with that nonsense.

I'd be very surprised as well if the unions agreed to it and would urge everyone to get on to their union.

I would imagine this is one element of the overall plan that will tweak and morph into something more workable. It may still be at Easter and after hours but probably on a voluntary and paid basis.

Or doesn't happen at all.

Panga

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Or doesn't happen at all.

And now it will be teachers fault if the orals don't run...

Bobtheman

Nothing has been officially published about Easter and orals. Hold your horses.
They won't be frog marching in unpaid teacher's. Get a grip people.

Panga

Bobtheman wrote: »

Nothing has been officially published about Easter and orals. Hold your horses.
They won't be frog marching in unpaid teacher's. Get a grip people.

Was the DES letter today not official? Genuinely asking.

acequion

Yes but Panga look at the wording! Nothing anywhere that would imply obligation to do this. Because quite simply you cannot force any worker to work during holidays or to work for free. Even though the whole country now seems to expect teachers to do just that :rolleyes:

But teachers need to hold tough on this one and refuse. Apart at all from us being under no obligation to work when on leave, our getting involved at all puts us in a very precarious position. What if the kid has an issue with the way the exam is conducted or a myriad of other complaints he might level at the hapless teacher roped into conducting the exam. Even the very idea is ludicrous.

We'll have enough on our plate working out the PG. Let's keep well away from this!

Panga

acequion wrote: »

Yes but Panga look at the wording! Nothing anywhere that would imply obligation to do this. Because quite simply you cannot force any worker to work during holidays or to work for free. Even though the whole country now seems to expect teachers to do just that :rolleyes:

But teachers need to hold tough on this one and refuse. Apart at all from us being under no obligation to work when on leave, our getting involved at all puts us in a very precarious position. What if the kid has an issue with the way the exam is conducted or a myriad of other complaints he might level at the hapless teacher roped into conducting the exam. Even the very idea is ludicrous.

We'll have enough on our plate working out the PG. Let's keep well away from this!

I agree with everything you've said.


However I think teachers will feel pressure from management to run the orals "for the good of the school". Many will agree to do it just to keep the peace. It will be argued that we're giving them a predicted grade anyway so why not examine their oral exam.

km79

Bobtheman wrote: »

Nothing has been officially published about Easter and orals. Hold your horses.
They won't be frog marching in unpaid teacher's. Get a grip people.

It will be paid by SEC

acequion

Panga wrote: »

I agree with everything you've said.


However I think teachers will feel pressure from management to run the orals "for the good of the school". Many will agree to do it just to keep the peace. It will be argued that we're giving them a predicted grade anyway so why not examine their oral exam.

Plenty of arguments against that. Like I say the teachers are expected to do the PG side of things but not the state exams. So why mess with the orals which are state exams and why put language teachers only in this position! I would also see both unions taking issue on this and members need to pressure them so it would really take an asshole of a school manager to force or manipulate a teacher into doing something as big as this. I'd be more afraid that you'd have a big amount of silly and possibly non unionised teachers willing to put their heads on the block. And yes I know that young teachers want to show eagerness and are vulnerable etc etc but there are limits!

Treppen

Icsics wrote: »

No, they’re not saying cancel them just that they cannot be used for ACs

Ya but that's just the JMB flexing, at the end of the the DES said that teachers use their Professional Judgement.
Maybe the JMB mightn't want principals being in the position of taking responsibly for having students sitting together in 2:30 hrs stints for a week.
But what I heard was " Mocks MUST NOT run".

History Queen

Treppen wrote: »

Ya but that's just the JMB flexing, at the end of the the DES said that teachers use their Professional Judgement.
Maybe the JMB mightn't want principals being in the position of taking responsibly for having students sitting together in 2:30 hrs stints for a week.
But what I heard was " Mocks MUST NOT run".

Seems unfair to students sitting the exam to prohibit them for a practice go at a full length paper.

am_zarathustra

Treppen wrote: »

Ya but that's just the JMB flexing, at the end of the the DES said that teachers use their Professional Judgement.
Maybe the JMB mightn't want principals being in the position of taking responsibly for having students sitting together in 2:30 hrs stints for a week.
But what I heard was " Mocks MUST NOT run".

I've two hours blocks.....the kids might end up staying a bit late one day as the work to be completed in silence for that way will actually take a little longer. The JMB are absolutely outside their remit and the Independent should have more than that if they are publishing that info, even as a maybe

km79

am_zarathustra wrote: »

I've two hours blocks.....the kids might end up staying a bit late one day as the work to be completed in silence for that way will actually take a little longer. The JMB are absolutely outside their remit and the Independent should have more than that if they are publishing that info, even as a maybe

What happens though if a large proportion choose not to do exams ?
We are getting them back into school buildings and then not teaching them for one/two weeks ?
Where do they go?

Treppen

History Queen wrote: »

Seems unfair to students sitting the exam to prohibit them for a practice go at a full length paper.

Conspiracy theory tells me it's a way of dissuading students from sitting the actual exam. Which is what the DES wanted from the get go.