blanch152 wrote: » You are correct about the fairness of the Leaving Certificate, but it is only a limited fairness. It does not take into account the complete work done over the previous 13 or 14 years, neither does it deal with exceptional issues that happen on the day/week to individual students. It is a limited form of assessment based on performance on a single day. Yes, it has been improved with oral, aural and project/practical work also featuring as part of the assessment process, but at the end of the day it is only the most practical, least unfair method of a selection of unfair and impractical methods of assessment of such a large cohort. But that is probably a discussion for another day on another thread.
km79 wrote: » I haven’t received a clarification yet When I do I will be sure and post it on After Hours just in case you miss it here
Sober Crappy Chemis wrote: » One assumes the situation right at this moment is that all schools are closed until at least 5th of May?
randylonghorn wrote: » Given that we are on national lockdown until the 5th of May, school buildings will not re-open before then. Or probably then. There are definitional issues about the word "closed" at the moment.
Sober Crappy Chemis wrote: » Erm okay. It was a serious question but obviously you've interpreted it in some offensive fashion for some inexplicable reason. Maybe someone else can answer?
km79 wrote: » Teachers assumed the days they were working are being counted as days of work. The government have changed the language they used with implications they are not. There are 6 weeks of our normal school year. I asked for clarification that this work is being counted. I have received none. But sure it will be grand . Why wouldn't we just plough on in hope and trust them
km79 wrote: » Really hoping for some more information before we return on Monday
RealJohn wrote: » So what? My job is to do what’s best for my students, not what they want. No, they don’t. No, it doesn’t. In most cases, it’ll have been one teacher who marked all of those tests, and “that teacher hates me, because he taught my brother, and my brother has dyslexia, so he couldn’t do any homework”. The people who feel they were hard done by will talk about it for the rest of their lives. The idea of predicted grades is a complete non-runner, and we should stop entertaining it as if it’s in any way acceptable. It simply isn’t.
acequion wrote: » Kieran Christie confirmed to me in an email that those weeks are being counted and I'll pm you the email if you like. But if he confirmed it to me he'll confirm it to any other member who asks. Here is a copy and paste from that email:"On a detail, the last several weeks of closure are and have been counted as tuition days as teachers were engaged in online teaching". As well as raising that with head office I also raised it with my local TD, a former collegue. Obviously it's imperative that those days are counted. Absolutely not having a go at you km [or anyone for that matter] but what's the rush for information?? It was the rush for information that led to the great information on good Friday that fcuked up everyone's Easter! It was the rush for information that appeared to pressure the Dept into detonating their time bomb on good Friday! It was the rush for information that lead to all the misinformation! And here we are now with far more questions than answers. Information from the DES is almost always bad news. So it really is a case of no news is good news. Anyway, in a constantly evolving situation like this one all news is quickly old news. I fervently wish the Dept had waited before freaking us all out with plans that may never see the light of day and I hope they might learn from it and wait from now on. I'm happy to just get on with things on Monday and I'm not going to lose sleep over how to keep the 3rd years engaged. That horse has bolted now thanks to premature "information."
km79 wrote: » I meant more information from the SC meeting as to whether an agreement was now in place, if not when consultations would take place etc I later posted about the “update “ I received from SC rep I included K Christie in a lengthy email I sent this morning That’s one of the questions I asked for immediate clarity on Good to see you got it Why can’t they just post it on the site ? It’s something a lot of teachers are wondering /worried about since the day we closed
Bobtheman wrote: » I have not read the entire thread. Busy with kids so apologies if repeating. Are we going to hold the line on not correcting our own pupils for a state exam? I say we meaning the Asti. TUI will agree to anything.
Treppen wrote: » VFT is calling on exams to be cancelled now!! That would cure the uncertainty! Bit light on suggested alternatives though. What I gathered from it was to let colleges sort it out and everyone would get their course! I think I'd rather just wait and see. 3 months is a long way away yet. People need to calm down and stop feeding the leaving cert hysteria.
Inspector Coptoor wrote: » The Leaving Cert is an assessment of a student after completing a 2 year senior cycle curriculum. It’s not intended to cover 12-13 years of material. The very notion that that is what the LC is meant to be there for is so wide of the mark. Tests and exams are part of life.
mirrorwall14 wrote: » I agree at this point. Just set the date and timetable and say it is happening and exactly how unless something drastic happens with the public health. I’m already rescheduled the planning for them and what their run in will be However the junior cert needs to go
km79 wrote: » What we really need in the coming week or 2 is the FINAL AGREEMENT between Minister and all the relevant stakeholders. This should provide absolute clarity for all on what is planned re running of exams, class time etc etc AND most importantly what happens in the event public health dictates a complete cancellation. The JC exams will surely go either way Also I received a reply from Kieran Christie to his credit. Nothing from the President yet. "I have read your submission below and the points you make are duly noted. They also serve to inform our position, together with the hundreds of other submissions we have received, in the coming weeks and months.On a detail, there is no compulsion on teachers to participate in the proposed July provision etc. if they are unavailable. No adverse consequence can be imposed on them by their school for not participating either." I replied asking that they reiterate this point to all members on the website as there continues to be misinformation in the media.
Drumpot wrote: » The COVID19 outbreak is possibly the biggest test of our generation. Trying to shoe horn in exams in between will represent a massive failing. The lack of Vision and capacity to adapt is quite disappointing to be honest but not surprising. The only thing I will say is that they don’t necessarily have to make any calls yet but exams are not a necessity no matter how people will try to paint it. They are not life or death like the virus is, no matter how much a person values their education. Objectively exams are just a man made construct that can be changed if we want. Quite often our society really struggles with a quite rigid mindset when it comes to this virus and what sort of policies should be considered. We need to adapt to the environment being created by the virus not just try to squeeze our normal practises around it. Realistically, this virus is going to be around for months to years with a vaccine a long time away, coming up with a better longer term solution (with so much technology available) would be a more appropriate response.
pandoraj09 wrote: » That's very interesting. I wonder how many Principals will mention that in the email we'll surely get from them on Monday morning? So say I tell management I'm unavailable in July. Will other teachers on the staff who willingly put on the green jersey have to teach the classes I'm not there to teach? Is is only the 6th years that are coming in? I'd say this will cause a lot of resentment among staff, some choosing to come in and some not. It will cause issues for management trying to manage social distancing among staff and students and if only a few teachers turn up will the school be able to function, whatever that will mean in July? I'm not saying it should be classed as compulsory, just wondering what way management will put it in their emails. Non permanent ( and permanent) staff may feel pressurised to turn up and it may make for a bad atmosphere in staff rooms in September. I'm not saying I won't do it. I'm not saying I will. I feel stressed even thinking about all this online stuff starting up again.
Millem wrote: » I got an email from my principal saying the two weeks of July are for “all staff”! Basically the 6th year classes will be divided up. No mention of voluntary. The 15th June - 15th July is for 6th year teachers only....to engage in remote learning and teaching. Unbelievable.
jayo76 wrote: » Yeah I really think the period from the middle of June to the middle of July we need immediate clarity on and that the ASTI should be seeking clarity and giving direction on. Making myself available for the two weeks in July I can make my peace with but I am not engaging in any "teaching and learning remotely" from the 15th to June to 15th July. I will make myself available to "support" my LC between those dates but to me that support means answering queries, maybe correcting extra essays they have done, offering guidance and I would expect to make myself available for this on clearly defined days and times during this period. I will not and really think we shouldnt be asked to be teaching classes in that period. I really would like the Union to have a position on this before individual managements start issuing their expectations.
pandoraj09 wrote: » Totally agree with the above. My LCs are quite helpless. They need to be spoon fed in the classroom and have been sending me endless messages about not being able to access audio files etc from the phones they're using for remote work. I can imagine the constant stream of messages I'd be getting in June/July. I'm getting anxious just thinking about the email from management.
Bobtheman wrote: » I'm a bit surprised by some of the posts here. It's all voluntary. From the end of May until mid July its suggested you keep in touch with pupils but they can't force you to do that either. Its up to each teacher to decide what's fair. As to the JC that's a lifetime away. September. I can't see the Asti agreeing to us correcting students for exam purposes. State exams Principals can write whatever they like . Its up to you to decide yourself. But for some on the career ladder or without a backbone it's roll over time.
Bobtheman wrote: » It's all voluntary. It's up to you to set the parameters of what happens after June. Completely If you can't say no to pupils then that's your issue. Completely. But you can't blame the ASTI or your management
