Grinds/Private schools - your opinion

EdgarAllenPoo

OK my personal opinion is that if I or my parents could have afforded it I would happily have gone to a grinds school last year.

I didn't go to school at all for the last year and that badly hurt my results, my parents did offer to send me to a grinds school when we moved back closer to Dublin but I didn't want them spending that much money on me.

Are grinds/private schools a good idea, do you get a better standard of education than from public schools?

How many people on these forums go or have gone to private/grinds schools and what are your experiences of it.

randomfella

From my experience of people who went there. They were ungrateful for the thousands of euro their parents spent on them and simply wasted the year, granted thats just the odd few people.
IMO its such a cop-out going to a grinds school, such an unfair advantage over everyone else. Its so true. The inequality and injustice of our educatonal system is shocking. Rich kids pay for their education while the rest just have to work HARDER for it.


On a related note, Do u think that people who get 600 have no lives?

Red Soup

randomfella wrote:

On a related note, Do u think that people who get 600 have no lives?

some people are just damn smart. and some have that photographic memory thing (damn never had that..).
but there are a few that you'd just wonder

randomfella

no amount of smartness can make u get 600 without studying like mad. The worst thing is hearing people say, didnt really study for it, got 500 or someother bull.

Red Soup

ah hell, it's all over. never again. hellll yeah

griffdaddy

ehh i think it's a bit unfair to lump private schools and grind schools into the same category there mate. A grind school isnt officially a school in the eyes of the government, it's a private limited company, which is why they dont do 1st to 3rd year (it's compulsory to attend a SCHOOL at that age.) This is also why they sit their leavings in real schools, grind schools cant be an exam centre. A grind schools pays entirely for the teachers wages themselves, with no government subsidising.

A private school is an officailly recognised school, and the teachers wages are paid entirely by the government. The reason they attract good teachers is because of the good name they have and the fact that many students return to their alma mater. The fees paid by parents don't go towards just 'buying an education', they go towards building facilities for extra curricular activites so the student isn't just geared towards the leaving like a grind school. Indeed, in many places the fees are used to support a scholarship scheme for disadvantaged students, for instance, in my school 15% of all students are scholarship with a view to get that number up to 25% over the next 5 years.

I think there's a big difference there that should be noted and it should be realised that all private schools aren't like CastleRock out of Ross O Carroll Kelly

newgrange

If you are the sort of student will work hard, has academic ability, and a desire to succeed, do you think it makes a difference whether you go to a grind school or not?

Do you think it makes a difference where you go?

Is it about perceived quality of teaching?

If those three (all A1) kids in Cork had gone to grind schools would they have done even better?

Are their teachers better/worse than grind schools?

Does the fact that your parents are paying out lots of money for you to go to a grind school influence how hard you work?

People get what they work for. For someone to say they got 600 points without working at all is a lie and an insult to people who have to work very hard to get a bare pass. There is nothing shameful about working hard and getting what you deserve.

angeldelight

I've given my opinion on this loads of times, again, I really disagree with grind schools for the majority of people. Yes Leaving Cert results are important but school is about more than results. You get lots of notes yes but if you spend the time studying books etc you get in a normal school you can still get good results! Yes there are some bad teachers in some schools but the majority will go out of their way to help you if you show that you're putting in some effort.

I went to the local VEC, did my LC in 2004 and got 590. There were awful messers in some of my classes, some who didn't care but teachers knew that some of us did and went out of their way for us, coming in early staying late etc. Also I had great fun continuing debating for the school in sixth year, having a laugh with friends and going to all the school events.

As for the other question, I did have a life! Yes I studied most days after school and on Sundays, but I saw my bf every Friday and Saturday. Went out with friends during the week. And yes I know I didn't get 600 but couldn't have got much closer.. 89% for my A2!

EdgarAllenPoo

randomfella wrote:

The worst thing is hearing people say, didnt really study for it, got 500 or someother bull.

Yes, I knew I wasn't going to get 600 points but I was horribly dissapointed with what I did get and it's been a little sickening looking at these pages with the amount of people here who have gotten 480 or more.

From the amount of people here that had high points it seemed like a lot may be from grinds schools. They may not have gone to grinds schools and just worked hard or got very lucky but I have a feeling there's a good few people here that did take the private root.

Fair ****s to anyone that got that amount of points. I don't begrudge them their results. If I have kids I'll be sending them to private schools.

I'm going to private college in September and because my maths didn't work out I have to do a supplementary maths exam and then get a place on the course. They have been incredibly helpful over the last few days.

newgrange

GDM wrote:

From the amount of people here that had high points it seemed like a lot may be from grinds schools.

Many of the LC students on boards have internet access at home. They are not representative of the majority of people who sat the LC. It's quite possible many or most of them attended private or grind schools, but this is not the norm nationwide.

Moonbeam

I went to both they seriously can not be compared.

Private schools from my experience have smaller classes,more one to one contact with students,more in the way of extra curricular activities then normal schools.
Grinds schools (the institute) has huge classes,no extra curricular activities in 6th year and has the best notes ever.

Maybe you want to poll private against public or grind schools against normal schools?

Kate_17

I don't have a problem with grind schools. They're a facility available if people are able and willing to pay the money. A good grind school would make sure it had excellent teachers and would weed out disruptive students, which is a bonus.

Don't forget, however, that voluntary secondary school students frequently come out with equally brilliant results. I attend a state school and have just got 600 points. Really it's up to you whether you go for a grind school or not. I think if your teachers are good there's no reason why you shouldn't do as well in a state school.

Scarinae

randomfella wrote:

On a related note, Do u think that people who get 600 have no lives?

No. I know Laura Hurley, one of the girls from Cork who got nine A1s, and you definitely couldn't describe her as having no life. She's a hard worker and is extremely intelligent, but she's as far from being a geek as you can possibly get

I went to a private school, I got an academic scholarship, and it's completely different to a grind school. They had loads of extra curricular stuff for people to get involved in, such as sports and drama, that a grind school wouldn't have. They were definitely very supportive of sixth years though - we had our own separate area of the school, a study room, and a kitchen area for making food. We were allowed stay in school until nine to work if we wanted to. Ok, so there were a lot of people who didn't bother taking advantage of any of the facilities the school offered and it could be argued that they wasted ther parents money, but on the whole it was a huge help to people who were serious about studying. You have to remember though, anyone could get over 500 if they put their mind to it, you don't have to go to a grind school or a private school to achieve that

*marie*

A few people in my year left my school (a voluntary secondary) for grind schools, and there are at least 30 people in my year who did equally as well or better than they did. It's about how much work you put in yourself, that's it. (OK, and a tiny bit of it is natural intelligence!) Personally, I'd prefer the experience of a normal school and just working hard myself.

Scarinae

Also, if you go to a grinds school you don't have a Debs!

Dave!

I went to Ashfield for a week during Easter. I can't say it was too helpful, tbh. The notes they gave out were brilliant, but for physics, spanish, and geography, literally all they did was read through the notes. English and history was a bit more interactive, though. The notes were really good, and the comparative text answer I got in English saved my ass, cos I memorised it and rewrote it, lol... but I don't know if it was worth it. hmmm.

On the side topic, I don't think it's worth the amount of energy and study it takes to get 600(or 900, for f*ck sake) points. At the end of the day, it's an exam that will help you into college. I didn't enjoy most of the subjects, either. It's not worth spending hours every day and discarding your social life completely just to get all A1's. There is more to life than exams, and people take this way to seriously. If you need 600 points to get into your course, then that's fine if you really want the course; but some people think of this as a measure of their ability as a person, and I think that that's the wrong attitude, and those who think of it as such should seriously reevaluate their life, and put it into perspective. I would much prefer to climb a mountain and look at the amazing view. Seriously, just think of it as an exam, and not as a measure of yourself. It's not important.

Wow, I'm already talking about it retrospectively

Scraggs

I went to the institute at easter. i found it really beneficial and am glad i went.
i have no problem with grindschools but i know i wouldnt go myself full-time or send my kids to one as i think the ''normal'' private/voluntary schools offer more for students regarding extra-curricular activites and social-interaction among other things.

rainbow kirby

I did my LC in 2002. I took grinds(English, Irish, Accounting) and an extra subject (applied maths) in Ashfield. I found the English grinds to be fantastic, and with having a terrible teacher in school, the grinds almost certainly earned me my B1 in English. Irish was very helpful too... but I just couldn't put up with the workload of 8 honours subjects so I dropped to pass after the mocks. Ended up with an A2 at ordinary level Accounting was quite helpful too. Applied Maths was fantastic. Great teacher, great subject, great class and I ended up with an A1 in it
Grinds *are* helpful. But at the end of the day, you have to put the work in yourself.

defiantshrimp

The advantages of a grind school as I see them is that you are guaranteed a very high standard of teachers and if you have difficulty studying they seem to force you to do so! I went to a private school and there were a few teachers around that were really terrible and couldn't give a damn for their students, not that all the teachers were poor, most were excellent and dedicated. But a school, public or private, really has no means to remove a bad teacher unlike a for-profit grind school. But those advantages have to be weighed against the fact that they have no extra-curricular activities, any sort of school spirit or alumni associations.

randomfella wrote:

The inequality and injustice of our educatonal system is shocking. Rich kids pay for their education while the rest just have to work HARDER for it.

That is complete and utter bull. No amount of money will buy you 600 points. People have to work no matter how rich.

randomfella wrote:

On a related note, Do u think that people who get 600 have no lives?

No I don't, I know 3 people who got 600 points and it is quite possible to have a life and do well. Those who say otherwise are sorely jealous of others successes.

d4gurl

I have attended a private school for the last five years. Its a good school and all but when i found out this year that my prinicipal, vice principal and the best English teacher ever were all leaving it was a sign. Not to mention the awful Chemistry teacher i had (the whole class failed at Easter ok so one girl barely passed), German teacher = crap, the french teachers crap....then what can i do? I mean a person need good leadership and gudiance too and for a little bit extra i hope i will get my points! Im going to start sixth year in a grind school this September... Im going to miss my friends all the events and stuff are school did but this is the choice i have made so heres hoping! That said no one can do really well without studyin so people who say i didnt study blah blah are all faking!!

Shrimp

I am currently in a private school, and I find it is alot better then a public one. It's much more professinol, it's more relaxed yet still strict, it's like a college. I say with most things, shell out the cash and you'll get a better product. An advocate of that would be like buying an expensive TV, it's gonna be alot better then a cheap one.

(Ignore any typos, thats not a reflection of my education)

randomfella

DaveMcG wrote:

I went to Ashfield for a week during Easter. I can't say it was too helpful, tbh. The notes they gave out were brilliant, but for physics, spanish, and geography, literally all they did was read through the notes. English and history was a bit more interactive, though. The notes were really good, and the comparative text answer I got in English saved my ass, cos I memorised it and rewrote it, lol... but I don't know if it was worth it. hmmm.

On the side topic, I don't think it's worth the amount of energy and study it takes to get 600(or 900, for f*ck sake) points. At the end of the day, it's an exam that will help you into college. I didn't enjoy most of the subjects, either. It's not worth spending hours every day and discarding your social life completely just to get all A1's. There is more to life than exams, and people take this way to seriously. If you need 600 points to get into your course, then that's fine if you really want the course; but some people think of this as a measure of their ability as a person, and I think that that's the wrong attitude, and those who think of it as such should seriously reevaluate their life, and put it into perspective. I would much prefer to climb a mountain and look at the amazing view. Seriously, just think of it as an exam, and not as a measure of yourself. It's not important.

Wow, I'm already talking about it retrospectively

great post, u took words out of my mouth

Shrimp

I wouldnt entirely agree with you Dave. If someone isn't bolloxed putting in any effort intot he LC and they do terrible, or course you have reason to judge them. That would clearly show lack of commitment etc.

randomfella

defiantshrimp wrote:

That is complete and utter bull. No amount of money will buy you 600 points. People have to work no matter how rich. .

i agree, thats why i said "HARDER"

defiantshrimp wrote:

No I don't, I know 3 people who got 600 points and it is quite possible to have a life and do well. Those who say otherwise are sorely jealous of others successes.

yeah i'd be lying if i didn't say i was jealous of people who got 600 who isn't? Maybe its just because i didn't get what i wanted but thats not the issue.
Really step outside the situation, and look at these people's lives for the entirety of sixth year and possibly fifth year aswel. For that period they DO NOT have a life. I even noticed the difference between the social life i sacrificed for sixth year and results i got, and social life some people had and results they got.

i wouldnt say the more points you have the less personality but prob social life. Of course there are factors - natural intelligence, how hard u work on that, and your enviornment (school).

I went to public school, about 6 people got 500 plus.

Dave!

Thanks guys

If someone puts no effort in and fails, then they deserved it, really! But putting lots of effort in and turning 5th/6th year into the worst of your life is also a bad thing. There IS a middle ground, so... just have perspective.

Beau

randomfella wrote:

Really step outside the situation, and look at these people's lives for the entirety of sixth year and possibly fifth year aswel. For that period they DO NOT have a life.

Your wrong there man. My best mate played for 2 gaelic teams and 1 soccer team all through the year. Plus it was a huge part of his life, he won the All Ireland with the school that year then that same year he started drinking and went out a ****load.

I think if you get 600 points you have natural intelligence and a great ability to work. You sound like a dude who is mad jealous.

I would`ve hated to have gone to a grind school. If I had`nt my rugby I think I would`ve turned into a fat mess. I worked hard and played hard and got greeat results. Happy Days.

abercrombie

Beau wrote:

Your wrong there man. My best mate played for 2 gaelic teams and 1 soccer team all through the year. Plus it was a huge part of his life, he won the All Ireland with the school that year then that same year he started drinking and went out a ****load.

I think if you get 600 points you have natural intelligence and a great ability to work. You sound like a dude who is mad jealous.

I would`ve hated to have gone to a grind school. If I had`nt my rugby I think I would`ve turned into a fat mess. I worked hard and played hard and got greeat results. Happy Days.

yeah i think the exta-curicular activities in private schools are great...you need an outlet and something else to do besides studying! i've been going to a private school all my life, ever since junior infants and i wouldn't change that! I've had a great education so far...grind schools like the institute are good schools, they just hve their emphasis on, and only on work, study and points! I would crack up if i went there! A lot of girls in my year hve gone there for 5th year and again more hve left for 6th year. They all want to get the best results they can...though i don't think you have to go to a fee paying school to get these. Some of my friends go to public schools...2 of them got 600 this year and 3 got 580! And they werent studying every single night...they were out like the rest of us (and im a 5th year...well 6th year now)

I do have a problem however with parents who force their kids to do things that they dont wanna do! I know a guy who is going to a school that starts at 8am and finishes at 10pm every single day...monday to SATURDAY!!! His parents are taking his tv out of his room, confiscating his mobile, not allowing him to play any rugby or any sport that might, distract, him from his studies

Now, i think THAT is wrong

defiantshrimp

randomfella wrote:

Really step outside the situation, and look at these people's lives for the entirety of sixth year and possibly fifth year aswel. For that period they DO NOT have a life.

Again that is absolute bull. It is perfectly possible to have a good social life and get 600 points. I myself got 590 thus making me one of "these people” and I worked considerably less than most of my friends who were disappointed on results day. The difference was I worked consistently through 6th year and had a goal so I didn’t have to freak out when the mocks or whatever hit. I didn’t have to study most weekends until March or so. I also know rugby players in my school who were on the senior team that managed around 500 points despite the training they had to do almost all year. To get 600 points you do probably need to be quite bright but that doesn’t mean you won’t have a social life by any means. I agree with Beau you do sound like a dude who is mad jealous.

Kate_17

The inequality and injustice of our educatonal system is shocking. Rich kids pay for their education while the rest just have to work HARDER for it.

I'm with defiantshrimp here. I've heard quotes like this loads of times and it drives me nuts - people saying "grind schools should be closed down because people who can't pay don't have the chance to go" - utter nonsense. You can pay for great educational standards which is fine by me... I would do it for my own children in the future if I felt I needed to. But you can do equally as well in state schools if you work and have good teachers. You can be super-rich and attend any grind school, but it doesn't mean you'll come out with points for medicine just like that - you have to be bright and work.

JC 2K3

Shrimp wrote:

I am currently in a private school, and I find it is alot better then a public one. It's much more professinol, it's more relaxed yet still strict, it's like a college. I say with most things, shell out the cash and you'll get a better product. An advocate of that would be like buying an expensive TV, it's gonna be alot better then a cheap one.

(Ignore any typos, thats not a reflection of my education)

How the hell would you know what a public school is like?

Dave!

^
Maybe they went to a public school before...? Maybe they're just repeating in a private one?

newgrange

Actually the only 'public' schools in this country are the VEC schools and Community Colleges (possibly the Comprehensives - I'm not sure of their management structure). All the brothers and convent schools, fee-paying or not, are privately-owned. They can reject students they do not feel are suited to their school. This may be on the basis of ability. If I run a school where I restrict entry to those capable of good marks in an exam, should I be surprised when they do? Should I claim it makes my school a 'better' school, when I made sure I did not take in the students who might get poor results?

Many people are experts on what they think is the case in other schools. For example, in terms of funding per student and equipment grants, VEC schools are much better funded than voluntary secondary/private schools. They also have smaller classes and much more specialist help available.

They are also the only real progressive force in Irish education. All the PLC courses - who started them? Not private and voluntary secondary schools - they all began in VEC schools. It is ironic that students for whom 'the Tech.' is not good enough when they are 12, come flocking to it when they are 18.

Traditionally in Dublin, 'the Tech.' became (following the introduction of free education in the 1960s) the place where those who could not get into the brothers and convents schols (which were perceived to be 'better') went. Prior to this, the VEC schools were where those who wanted a career in engineering etc. went, as they then went on to places like Kevin Street. Outside Dublin, where the vocational school might be the only school in the town, this type of snobbery did not develop.

A school is a school is a school. If you are bright, well-motivated, supported by your parents and have no real social pressures to leave school, you will do well wherever you are. Similarly the Institute or similar, no matter how much money is spent will not be able to get a child reading at under 10 to pass a Leaving Cert. They are suited to bright children without learning problems. Their staff do not have the experience to help such a child. They take in bright kids, or kids determined to work hard and do well and they get good results, it's not a mystery.

It doesn't mean private schools are better or worse - just different. If people have the money to pay for them, that is their right, but there are no statistics anywhere to say they are 'better' than other schools, on any level.

randomfella

Kate_17 wrote:

I'm with defiantshrimp here. I've heard quotes like this loads of times and it drives me nuts - people saying "grind schools should be closed down because people who can't pay don't have the chance to go" - utter nonsense. You can pay for great educational standards which is fine by me... I would do it for my own children in the future if I felt I needed to. But you can do equally as well in state schools if you work and have good teachers. You can be super-rich and attend any grind school, but it doesn't mean you'll come out with points for medicine just like that - you have to be bright and work.

The quote in italics is not what i said so don't apply this to me. THe point i'm making is that if you put the same person who works hard in a public school and then put him/her in a private school, he/she will get better results 99% of the time than working hard in the public school. I can't believe you couldn't grasp the concept of my BASIC point. Just look at league tables the facts are there.
You said you got 600? I say no more.

randomfella

defiantshrimp wrote:

Again that is absolute bull. It is perfectly possible to have a good social life and get 600 points. I myself got 590 thus making me one of "these people” and I worked considerably less than most of my friends who were disappointed on results day. The difference was I worked consistently through 6th year and had a goal so I didn’t have to freak out when the mocks or whatever hit. I didn’t have to study most weekends until March or so. I also know rugby players in my school who were on the senior team that managed around 500 points despite the training they had to do almost all year. To get 600 points you do probably need to be quite bright but that doesn’t mean you won’t have a social life by any means. I agree with Beau you do sound like a dude who is mad jealous.

Ok extra-cirricular activities - sport is one thing, something important to keep up but it doesn't end there. I mean spending time just not studying and relaxing. Hanging out, having a kick about, cinema, golf or whatever your into. Not admitting that you miss out on these to SOME extent when u get 600 is a lie and kick in the balls to people who worked hard to get less.

I can only go on personal experience of a public school and let me tell you for sure that people who get overe 550 have no lives for that year. Trust me. For ****s sake i know people who got 450 and never came out after March.
I admire a person pushing themselves to the limit to study and do so well so i'm not mad jealous as i already said who wouldn't be jealous of 600? I'm jealous of the result not the person and the work they put in. The reason why i asked "do you think people who get 600 have no lives for that year or two?" is because i've heard ppl like yourselves say that you have before, which i find to be completly untrue from my experience.

defiantshrimp

randomfella wrote:

THe point i'm making is that if you put the same person who works hard in a public school and then put him/her in a private school, he/she will get better results 99% of the time than working hard in the public school.

I'm sorry I must have missed that study. Where would I be able to read it? Leave the made up statistics where they belong, in your head. That is plain not true. A teacher can only give you material and inspire you. And since the LC is a set, well defined curriculum with a bit of self imitative and motivation you should get everything you need regardless of the quality of your teacher. And again you are assuming the teachers in private schools are better which probably isn’t the case in this country. A dedicated student will do well in any setting. Saying they “will get better results 99% of the time than working hard in the public school” is rubbish. It is the student who has to work for good grades not the teacher.

randomfella wrote:

Just look at league tables the facts are there.

We don't have league tables in this country, we have dodgy lists complied by the papers showing the amount of students going to certain 3rd level institutions and what schools they come from. Not a breakdown of LC scores, not an average points from each school, not an indication of the quality of teachers, nothing. Those tables neglect the fact that not everyone doing the LC in a school wants to go to college. The institute and other grind schools will look better because everyone there DOES want to go to college. Similarly in some private schools the same will apply. Also these “league tables” neglect to take into account the socio-economic make up of the pupils in the schools. For example those coming from a family where both parents and a sibling or two are graduates will be much more likely to go to 3rd level themselves. It is a much more difficult thing being the 1st in your family to go and quite possibly it may not be affordable to go to 3rd level depending on your background. All of these things heavily influence these “league tables” and have nothing to do with academic standards. Finally even then do the “league tables” show that a lot of public schools have a higher percentage of pupils going to so called “elite” universities than private ones. Especially when you compare private schools in one area with public schools in the same area.

Beau

randomfella wrote:

I say no more.

Then why continue.

randomfella wrote:

Not admitting that you miss out on these to SOME extent when u get 600 is a lie and kick in the balls to people who worked hard to get less.

Why is it a kick in the balls? Good on them.

randomfella wrote:

I can only go on personal experience of a public school and let me tell you for sure that people who get overe 550 have no lives for that year. Trust me.

Man we all know thats not true. Sure some will do that beacuse maybe they have to themseleves to get the points they need but whats the problem with that anyway? and what has that got to do with grind schools?

randomfella wrote:

I admire a person pushing themselves to the limit to study and do so well so i'm not mad jealous as i already said who wouldn't be jealous of 600?

eh...right

Kate_17

randomfella wrote:

The quote in italics is not what i said so don't apply this to me. THe point i'm making is that if you put the same person who works hard in a public school and then put him/her in a private school, he/she will get better results 99% of the time than working hard in the public school. I can't believe you couldn't grasp the concept of my BASIC point. Just look at league tables the facts are there.
You said you got 600? I say no more.

I wasn't attributing that quote to you so sorry if you took offence. I just meant it as a general example from what I have heard various people say.

League tables... this is a tricky one. Institute sends more pupils than any other school to uni... that's a good thing and I am not doubting that it is an excellent school. I would send my own children there if I thought it was necessary. To clarify - what I am saying is I think grind schools are a good idea and benefit many students, but you can do as well in public school if you work and have good teachers.... not sure would 99% of students do better in the grind schools. However they can be great cos teachers are consistently excellent, disruption is minimal and students are often older when doing LC, maybe repeating. If you have right attitude you can do fantastic in them. League tables are not always reliable... if we went by them per se, the best school in Donegal is Carrick VC, which is certainly not the case or anywhere near it.

As for the no life thing... I still had a life and allowed myself relaxation, although I will admit that it was less than in previous years. I know people who worked very hard this year, did well, very well, yet still had lives. Although it wasn't going out every weekend before exams.

randomfella

I meant by League Tables - those who go to certain colleges/universities etc and you knew that so stop trying to make it out as if i'm pulling facts from nowhere. Everybody knows that the majority of people by far who score highly in their leaving cert go to college. Thats why there is credibility in the tables. They don't want to release league tables, because if they do everybody will see the private schools/grind schools at the top. Thus endorsing these schools. So people who go to these schools have an unfair advantage over people who can't afford it (and yea i know about the scholarship thing, but don't u have to be smart already for that?). Then people won't go to certain schools because they think they might'nt do aswel there. That is the whole problem.

Personally i'd be in favour of releasing league tables. What do you think?

Beau, you are disagreeing with me for the sake of it. I'm not bothering with u.

newgrange

League tables would be a little more informative if we could also see what level of achievement the students in a school had on entry, and what students that school rejected and why. Without that, they're not showing the whole story, and are worse than useless as they are misleading.

You have to be able to compare like with like.

defiantshrimp

I agree with randomfella there should be league tables. We should have some measure of how a school is academically developing its students over the 5/6 years they are there. They should also give school management much more power to remove poor teachers and reward good ones. However both those things require the teachers unions to be taken on and the powers that be will never ever do that. Our precious education minister wouldn't want to "rock the boat"...

Beau

Yeh definatley we should have proper league tables rather than the poor ones we have now.

Rondomfella you were wreaking my head, you kept going over the same argument.

Kate_17

I agree with league tables as long as they are detailed.. not like those that are currently printed in the papers. They should show detailed info on results and actual no's that went to college compared with total numbers and where, not just percentages for example... and I agree that there should be powers to deal with those teachers not doing their job properly.

randomfella

I think if league tables were introduced it would force some teachers to take more pride in their job and force them to achieve better results through their students. Often i find if the teacher is pissed off by the odd guy in the class, they start not to give a **** about the rest. They are confident of retaining their job no matter how low the results go.

There must be downsides to league tables too.

Scarinae

randomfella wrote:

i know about the scholarship thing, but don't u have to be smart already for that?

Well yeah I guess, but I stuck that into the point I was making so that nobody would assume I was a spoiled Daddy's girl who didn't work for six years and wasted my parents' money. I think if they are going to release league tables they should be better than the current ones the papers compile - telling you how many students from each school go to a college doesn't tell you much that's useful. It doesn't tell you what course they are doing, whether or not they actually stick with it until the end, and it completely ignores people who go abroad to universities in Britain or the USA or whatever. Feel free to correct me on this, but don't league tables also ignore students who go to the ITs? What's wrong with going to an IT if the course you want to do is in one?

randomfella

Yeah i agree with u Fishie. If they do make league tables, they should be comprehensive including all details except names of students. For instance you can see where the average geography mark in a certain school compared to the national average, and how many students took it at ordinary level etc.

newgrange

Fishie wrote:

What's wrong with going to an IT if the course you want to do is in one?

Absolutely nothing wrong with it. It shows a maturity that some lack in the rush to 'high points' courses "because I will get the points". Nor is there anything wrong with choosing to go straight to work and not go to college at all.
People in the real world know this.

Scarinae

newgrange wrote:

It shows a maturity that some lack in the rush to 'high points' courses "because I will get the points".

In fairness, I think a lot of people who go for the high courses 'because they can get the points' are pushed into it by their relations and their teachers. It can be very difficult to resist them as well. For the last three years various people have tried coaxing me into going for medicine, without even considering the fact that I would have hated it. I have the utmost respect for doctors and everything, but it just isn't me - I hate blood, vomit, phlegm etc and I do not want to spend my life treating diseases because to be quite honest the idea of it grosses me out. But when I was in transition year my guidance counsellor took one look at my DAT scores, noted that I was good at science subjects and decided that I should do medicine. Ignoring my protests, she printed out information on medical courses in all the Irish universities and various British ones and started telling me about what a wonderful career I would have. In fifth year she got worse so I switched guidance counsellors to avoid her, and luckily my new one accepted that there was no way in hell I was going to apply for medicine. But that's the way that particular guidance counsellor is - if you could get high points and like science, she tries to get you into medicine; if you resist, she suggests pharmacy or engineering. If you could get high points and don't like science she tries pushing you into law. It is absolutely ridiculous. I was lucky that my parents are quite easygoing and wanted me to go for whatever I wanted - and they fully supported me in not wanting to do any of the high-points courses. However, there are many people whose parents are ambitious for ther kids but don't understand the points system - this is a dangerous combination, because some parents assume that if a course has high points then it is somehow 'better'. People like my old guidance counsellor are making life difficult for people who actually really want to do medicine or pharmacy or whatever, because they are taking advantage of students who are not quite sure where they want to end up and are pushing them into courses that look good for the school. Maybe I am a cynic, but I really think that guidance counsellors should know better than this

newgrange

Unfortunately, I think your experience of guidance counselling wouldn't be unique.

I went to school a million years ago, and there was a girl in our year who was really very bright and was heading for a huge number of points. All she wanted to do was Marketing, which was a very new course in the College of Marketing and Design (DIT now) - and I think to do it at the time needed one honour at honours level - possibly two.

The fight that girl had to put up with the careers teacher who wanted her to do medicine.... Luckily, like you, she had parents who wanted her to be happy and to do what she wanted to do, not what she was 'able' for. So, she went into Marketing. She was easily the highest qualified in her class, and had outstanding results all the way through college, was head-hunted by a top Irish company, and followed on with a Masters and other post-graduate work. She is now lecturing in Scotland. It was her dream job, and she got it, despite the efforts of so-called career guidance people.

It makes such a difference to end up in a job you like, rather than one you were 'able' for, regardless of the pay involved. The sooner we start to value other abilities apart from academic, the sooner we might get people happier in, and more suited to their courses/careers/jobs.

killermonkey

my god i thought our guidance counsellor was the only one! ive wantd to do medicine for about 4 years now and luckily i was able to accept the cao offer the other day, but one thing which is really worrying me is the kind of ppl who will be in my class next year. there are at least 3 ppl in my year who were convinced by our guidance counsellor (and in one case parents too) that they should do medicine cos they will have the points. its absolutely ridiculous. one of them is a friend of mine and he'll be in my class next year and he doesnt even know what a career in medicine will entail. im sorry to break it to everyone, but 99% of guidance counsellors got to their job through an arts degree, and while theres nothing at all wrong with that, i hardly think that their view of college and the reality of studying something like medicine is crystal clear. certainly in my friends case, he was told to go for med cos he was likely to get 600 (he did) and he shouldn't "sell himself short". this is what really makes me mad, is the fact that med is 590 in trinity this year, and its purely because ppl like this are tricked into believing that high points in the leaving cert makes you magically suitable for a high-points degree. admittedly a lot of them are idiots themselves anyway, and their ambition to succeed in the leaving cert is carried forward to an ambition to impress ppl by saying 'im doing medicine', but when u have parents and especially guidance counsellors - who REALLY should know better - trying to encourage this idiotic way of thinking its just so much worse. dont these ppl realise that u need ppl skills to deal with patients? and why the hell not undergo some kind of work experience if youre going for a career in medicine? ive met a lot of ppl who say they want to become doctors, but very few of whom can justify their claim. the leaving cert is a test of how well u can learn things from a book, and regurgitate it on paper. college and the profession for which u prepare yourself, is about how u can apply yourself to a huge amount of learning material, and what u can retain by independent learning. ppl just dont get it and i cant understand why. ANYWAY....!!! as for the whole public shool/grind school thingy, i went to a private school and loved it, and see nothing wrong with it. i would never encourage anyone to go to a grind school however. for one thing the atmosphere in those places is completely destructive, as the emphasis is solely on academic achievement with a view to advertise any successes just to attract more customers. i did an extra subject in one of those schools for the LC and although the standard of teaching was excellent, the overuse of 'predictions' was unsettling and i just felt the whole staying in on a friday night until 10.30 to study IN SCHOOL was pathetic. i did very well in the exams without that kind of work, and i think most ppl can afford to take a rest for one evening after a long hard week of learning? theyre not schools, theyre just buildings where classes go on - theyre totally impersonal and i think especially those who send their children to schools like bruce for junior cert (and especially those who are enrolled from first year onwards) are insane. god this was an angry post! anyone out there likeminded?

RacoonQueen

I went to a public school for my Junior Cert and a private school for my Leaving...strongly recommend sticking with the public schools, standard of teaching is much higher. Public schools also seem to monitor your progress/lack of progress more.

dublinguy2004

If you want a qualification; go to a grinds school. For an education, go to a normal school.

Of course the benifits of grinds schools are there to be seen and are great if you have the money. Of course no matter how fair one tries to make education, the privilidged will always have the advantage.

Nowadays, going to universities (even Trinity) is not that exclusive; the real elite are sending their sons/daughters further afield to places like Oxbridge/Ivy League/top european universities that rank far higher than the best Ireland can provide (and indeed cost a hell of a lot more).

So the points race is just a little rat race and people miss the fact that Irish universities are pretty dull. The correlation between intelligence and 600 pointers is debatable, but I think that it's a pretty good indicator of

i) intellegence
ii) committment and work-ethic
iii) ability to work under pressure
iv) suitability for academia

all of which are desirable qualities in prospective students/employees.