nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Deferred State Exams 2020 [SEE MOD NOTE POST #1]

political analyst

I'm aware that the new LC timetable will be published this June - public health permitting.

Regarding the usual schedule, why doesn't the State Exams Commission have the exams of both papers each in English, Irish and Maths in the Leaving and Junior Cert exams take place on the first 3 days of the exam period so that students will have the exams in the main subjects over with by the end of Day 3?

After all, the sooner the exams are over and done with, the better - right?!

MOD NOTE I'm setting up this thread as the one stop shop for all discusion about the state exams, preparing for these exams and the format this may take. Discussion can also take place about Mat leave contracts and factual information regarding these.
There will be a warning for anyone who:
a) moans about teachers holidays
b) moans about teachers pay
c) moans for the sake of moaning
D) this is NOT a discussion about school closures, that thread ran its course and this is not a replacement.
Usual forum rules also apply.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dylan94

The TUI have put up an FAQ document, which reads as though it was written directly by the DES

https://www.tui.ie/news/state-examinations-2020-frequently-asked-questions-in-the-context-of-covid-19.13735.html

It is not open to negotiation.
The TUI decided to engage constructively with the decision in the interests of students, their future
and social solidarity in this unprecedented crisis: the Covid-19 public health emergency.

Millem

km79 wrote: »

Kchristie@asti.ie
President@asti.ie

Might make them realise what the reality is and why they need to communicate clarifications on some issues immediately

I am tui

It’s a mixed union school.

km79

Dylan94 wrote: »

The TUI have put up an FAQ document, which reads as though it was written directly by the DES

https://www.tui.ie/news/state-examinations-2020-frequently-asked-questions-in-the-context-of-covid-19.13735.html

I was hoping for something like this from asti after SC meeting
The horse has bolted now

RealJohn

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.

I’m sorry, but this sort of borderline hysterical nonsense is the reason we have the government making idiotic, rushed decisions.
A “FINAL AGREEMENT” in the next week or two would be unbelievably premature, since we will still definitely have COVID cases in two weeks, but they might be massively reduced (there is some evidence we’ve already passed the peak) or we might have a spike as people become lax in their precautions, or anything in between. The absolute last thing we should be insisting on is that there is a “FINAL AGREEMENT” way before we know what things are likely to be like by the time the exams come around. We are all adults here. It’s time to calm down, and discuss this sensibly, without making demands of people who probably don’t even know this thread exists.

“Absolute clarity” is a pipe dream, at this stage.
A “FINAL AGREEMENT” is virtually guaranteed to be unnecessarily deficient at this stage.
Calm down. We still have more than six whole weeks at this stage before the date the exams were even supposed to start, so no, we do not need or want a “FINAL AGREEMENT” in two weeks, and you can be guaranteed that that “FINAL AGREEMENT” will be deeply flawed from everyone’s perspective if we have one before we have a reasonable idea of where we stand with regards the progression or regression of the virus.

RealJohn

Dylan94 wrote: »

The TUI have put up an FAQ document, which reads as though it was written directly by the DES

https://www.tui.ie/news/state-examinations-2020-frequently-asked-questions-in-the-context-of-covid-19.13735.html

I think you’re misrepresenting that FAQ document with that quote, and with the assertion that it reads like “it was written directly by the DES”. I was pleasantly surprised when I read it, perhaps because I’ve been listening to too much doom and gloom around here.

ethical

I think its time to call for a vote of no confidence on Ms MacDonald of the ASTI as she has misrepresented her members and has practically destroyed the last two weeks which was supoosed to be an Easter Break.

We are heading into very muddy waters on Monday morning!

km79

RealJohn wrote: »

I’m sorry, but this sort of borderline hysterical nonsense is the reason we have the government making idiotic, rushed decisions.
A “FINAL AGREEMENT” in the next week or two would be unbelievably premature, since we will still definitely have COVID cases in two weeks, but they might be massively reduced (there is some evidence we’ve already passed the peak) or we might have a spike as people become lax in their precautions, or anything in between. The absolute last thing we should be insisting on is that there is a “FINAL AGREEMENT” way before we know what things are likely to be like by the time the exams come around. We are all adults here. It’s time to calm down, and discuss this sensibly, without making demands of people who probably don’t even know this thread exists.

“Absolute clarity” is a pipe dream, at this stage.
A “FINAL AGREEMENT” is virtually guaranteed to be unnecessarily deficient at this stage.
Calm down. We still have more than six whole weeks at this stage before the date the exams were even supposed to start, so no, we do not need or want a “FINAL AGREEMENT” in two weeks, and you can be guaranteed that that “FINAL AGREEMENT” will be deeply flawed from everyone’s perspective if we have one before we have a reasonable idea of where we stand with regards the progression or regression of the virus.

Did you miss the last bit where I said it most importantly would include details of what will happen in the even public health dictates that the LC ends up being cancelled?

Did you miss the posts a few back from a poster who has received an email from their principals today at odds with what K Christie sent to me this morning ?

Final agreement was a poor choice of words from me. That’s all you seem to have latched on
Replace those words with “Guidelines” or something to that effect
There is currently an unworkable “proposal” causing mass confusion
I want a clearer document issued
I don’t care what it is called
That is not hysterical
We are returning to school on Monday and there is far too much confusion and misinformation floating around

ethical

Can someone please put a copy of the TUI info up here.
Thank you

km79

ethical wrote: »

Can someone please put a copy of the TUI info up here.
Thank you

https://www.tui.ie/_fileupload/State%20Examinations%202020%20%20Frequently%20Asked%20Questions%20in%20the%20context%20of%20Covid-19%20-1.pdf

RealJohn

km79 wrote: »

Did you miss the last bit where I said it most importantly would include details of what will happen in the even public health dictates that the LC ends up being cancelled?

Did you miss the posts a few back from a poster who has received an email from their principals today at odds with what K Christie sent to me this morning ?

Final agreement was a poor choice of words from me. That’s all you seem to have latched on
Replace those words with “Guidelines” or something to that effect
There is currently an unworkable “proposal” causing mass confusion
I want a clearer document issued
I don’t care what it is called
That is not hysterical
We are returning to school on Monday and there is far too much confusion and misinformation floating around

Well you emphasised the words “FINAL AGREEMENT” (the capitalisation is yours, not mine), so why do you think I “latched on” to it? You also used the phrase “absolute clarity” in the same paragraph. You can say you meant that all of that was dependent on the actual health situation but that isn’t how it comes across, based on how you presented it. Either you meant the first paragraph as you wrote it (which, based on the number of times you’ve insisted that the leaving cert should be cancelled, is what I believe) or it should be taken in the context of the overall public health picture, which means it was all nonsense anyway.
Either way, that paragraph was definitely hysterical.

I’d also like to know how you figure that the current proposals are “unworkable” (unless it’s because you think the leaving cert must be cancelled, in which case, you don’t need to say that again).
I don’t think there ought to be any confusion for teachers on Monday anyway. Teach your classes as best you can, just like I’m sure you were on the Friday before the Easter holidays. That’s certainly what I’ll be doing.

km79

RealJohn wrote: »

Well you emphasised the words “FINAL AGREEMENT” (the capitalisation is yours, not mine), so why do you think I “latched on” to it? You also used the phrase “absolute clarity” in the same paragraph. You can say you meant that all of that was dependent on the actual health situation but that isn’t how it comes across, based on how you presented it. Either you meant the first paragraph as you wrote it (which, based on the number of times you’ve insisted that the leaving cert should be cancelled, is what I believe) or it should be taken in the context of the overall public health picture, which means it was all nonsense anyway.
Either way, that paragraph was definitely hysterical.

I’d also like to know how you figure that the current proposals are “unworkable” (unless it’s because you think the leaving cert must be cancelled, in which case, you don’t need to say that again).
I don’t think there ought to be any confusion for teachers on Monday anyway. Teach your classes as best you can, just like I’m sure you were on the Friday before the Easter holidays. That’s certainly what I’ll be doing.

I have never ever said the LC should be cancelled
Never
Not once

I have said the practicals should be as the students all needed to treated the same . So all get 100%
This also frees up more “classroom instruction “ time in July
What I have also said is I want to see well ahead of time the plan IF the LC is canceled.
I don’t want to see another hastily thrown together “proposal “ with no consultation

The JC exams being proposed are unworkable imo and really effect the new school year

I’ll leave it at that as ive said it all before
What I never said was the LC should be cancelled

Bobtheman

jayo76 wrote: »

Again I have to say to you I will hold my ground and do what I deem fair and reasonable for me and the students. Many non permanent teachers its not so easy to do if management say this is what you should be doing. Many of the non permanet teachers in my school as an example were willing to attend SLAR meetings outside school hours as management asked them to do so and to keep onside and protect job possibilities they had no choice.

Yes exploitation will always occur and management will always be open to it.

acequion

I completely agree with RealJohn. If there is one thing denied to everybody in the planet at this point in time,it's clarity. Much as we all hate not being able to plan out and map out our lives we just have to suck it up. And I fully agree and have posted already that this insistence on clarity, information,agreements, plan Bs etc etc is exactly what is causing the DES, never the most efficient of Govt departments, to make major blunders.

I second the call to just calm down. Get back to work on Monday and just get on with it. I do realise that some school managements might lose the run of themselves in their demands and in that case I do agree that unions need to issue guidelines. And we, the members, need to demand this. But that really is as much clarity as we can hope for at the moment.

Bobtheman

km79 wrote: »

Did you miss the last bit where I said it most importantly would include details of what will happen in the even public health dictates that the LC ends up being cancelled?

Did you miss the posts a few back from a poster who has received an email from their principals today at odds with what K Christie sent to me this morning ?

Final agreement was a poor choice of words from me. That’s all you seem to have latched on
Replace those words with “Guidelines” or something to that effect
There is currently an unworkable “proposal” causing mass confusion
I want a clearer document issued
I don’t care what it is called
That is not hysterical
We are returning to school on Monday and there is far too much confusion and misinformation floating around

We ain't returning to school Monday. Everything is voluntary. I have not read anything that says otherwise from the ASTI. I'm sure a clearer document will emerge . Any rational examination of the facts would tell you it has to be voluntary.. no legal power. Plus there is no manual on how to run a state during these times. Thus a lot of this has to be see how it goes. Lives at stake.
Best advice focus on next two weeks teaching online.You can decide what to do in June and July later on depending on what YOU think is right not management or the Minister unless you are temporary/ have your head up Management's backside or have no backbone

km79

Bobtheman wrote: »

We ain't returning to school Monday. Everything is voluntary. I have not read anything that says otherwise from the ASTI. I'm sure a clearer document will emerge . Any rational examination of the facts would tell you it has to be voluntary.. no legal power. Plus there is no manual on how to run a state during these times. Thus a lot of this has to be see how it goes. Life's at stake.

We are. Just in a different way. A way that we believe is being counted as tuition days. However on the Depts website in black and white it says that all our work before Easter is not classed as "Classroom Instruction days". A new term.......Is it too much to have asked for that the union clarified this before we plough on for another 6 weeks?

Anyway I will bow out and enjoy the rest of this evening before spending tomorrow preparing for school Monday. It has always been "school" to me not "work".
For how much longer that will be the case I do not know

History Queen

RealJohn wrote: »

I think you’re misrepresenting that FAQ document with that quote, and with the assertion that it reads like “it was written directly by the DES”. I was pleasantly surprised when I read it, perhaps because I’ve been listening to too much doom and gloom around here.

I felt the same. I'm a TUI member and often critical of the union but I do find the document both informative and reassuring. It certainly addresses some of the queries I had and points out what negotiations/discussions are ongoing.

km79

History Queen wrote: »

I felt the same. I'm a TUI member and often critical of the union but I do find the document both informative and reassuring. It certainly addresses some of the queries I had and points out what negotiations/discussions are ongoing.

I agree and expected the same from the ASTI

Now I am out

mirrorwall14

I’m disappointed in this one:

Am I being asked to examine my current Junior Cycle Students in September?
The papers and marking schemes which have already been prepared for the now cancelled written examinations by the SEC will be given to schools following the re-opening of schools in September.
No state certified Junior Certificate examinations will take place this year and teachers are not being asked to mark exams for state certification.

There’s no difference to me in the amount of time it will take to correct two sets of third year papers whether it is state certified or not. It shouldn’t be happening at all. Full stop

Bobtheman

I just read the TUI document. It's certainly clearer but it does not contradict anything the ASTI says. Everything is voluntary. The minister " asks' not instructs. As to the JC that is a lifetime away . This is a once in a century event. There is no manual therefore how can anybody demand clarity - even a month ahead.
I doubt the ASTI will agree to correcting our own pupils for JC. There would have to be a vote on that.

spurious

Bobtheman wrote: »

I doubt the ASTI will agree to correcting our own pupils for JC. There would have to be a vote on that.

And TUI policy on that is as long as there is training and it is paid, so I can't see them OKing it either.

History Queen

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

I’m disappointed in this one:

Am I being asked to examine my current Junior Cycle Students in September?
The papers and marking schemes which have already been prepared for the now cancelled written examinations by the SEC will be given to schools following the re-opening of schools in September.
No state certified Junior Certificate examinations will take place this year and teachers are not being asked to mark exams for state certification.

There’s no difference to me in the amount of time it will take to correct two sets of third year papers whether it is state certified or not. It shouldn’t be happening at all. Full stop

I do agree with you on this but I just don't see it happening because of the impact it will have on the new school year which at his stage is likely to be disrupted in some form anyway without adding pointless exams. We had a whole school inspection this year and a lot of the focus was on avoiding "over assessing" ie replace summer/Christmas exams with CBAs etc.

Surely making students sit an exam just for the sake of it is the very definition of over assessing? Particularly when it will disrupt two year groups beginning the new school year (5th and TY). Now I could be totally wrong but I feel (based on nothing only my opinion) that this plan will be shelved closer to the time.

km79

Bobtheman wrote: »

I just read the TUI document. It's certainly clearer but it does not contradict anything the ASTI says. Everything is voluntary. The minister " asks' not instructs. As to the JC that is a lifetime away . This is a once in a century event. There is no manual therefore how can anybody demand clarity - even a month ahead.
I doubt the ASTI will agree to correcting our own pupils for JC. There would have to be a vote on that.

That document has cleared up some of my questions
Hopefully the ASTI will issue similar
Fully expect the JC exams to go

maude6868

I will do the 2 weeks in July if they are used for next year's Croke Park hours. I think that's only fair.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Every school is different but if the July tuition goes ahead we'll have really low attendance for anything other than necessary assessment or project completion.

I would think some students would be afraid of getting the virus before the exams and not risk coming in, unless they have to.

Edit: also the whole-school aspect (one-in-all-in) gives scope to managers to bring in entire staff for full 2 weeks and have them supervising a corner flag for the fortnight if they want

deiseindublin

History Queen wrote: »

I felt the same. I'm a TUI member and often critical of the union but I do find the document both informative and reassuring. It certainly addresses some of the queries I had and points out what negotiations/discussions are ongoing.

I agree, but I am disappointed by how vague there were on JC corrections. It's all fine and well to say we will not be correcting a state certified JC, but does that mean we are correcting a school certified JC?

Teachers want to know if they are correcting it, not who is certifying it.

Am I being asked to examine my current Junior Cycle Students in September?

The papers and marking schemes which have already been prepared for the now cancelled written examinations by the SEC will be given to schools following the re-opening of schools in September.

No state certified Junior Certificate examinations will take place this year and teachers are not being asked to mark exams for state certification.

Inspector Coptoor

ethical wrote: »

I think its time to call for a vote of no confidence on Ms MacDonald of the ASTI as she has misrepresented her members and has practically destroyed the last two weeks which was supoosed to be an Easter Break.

We are heading into very muddy waters on Monday morning!

Ah here - a vote of no confidence?
Seriously?

I’ve confidence in her.

It’s not in the interest of union members for her to come out calling the shots and saying no to things right now.
This is an evolving crisis situation.

We return to work on Monday as we did pre Easter (if we can).
We continue to muddle through and do our best and take it one day at a time.

A week is a long time in politics.
6 weeks is a long time in a pandemic.

Let’s just all take a deep breath and get on with it and not go calling for votes of no confidence.

solerina

maude6868 wrote: »

I will do the 2 weeks in July if they are used for next year's Croke Park hours. I think that's only fair.

Actually this is an excellent point, these hours really should be counted !!

mirrorwall14

deiseindublin wrote: »

I agree, but I am disappointed by how vague there were on JC corrections. It's all fine and well to say we will not be correcting a state certified JC, but does that mean we are correcting a school certified JC?

Teachers want to know if they are correcting it, not who is certifying it.

Exactly, you phrased it better than me.

I think there’s a real issue teaching for two weeks if we need severe social distancing and it would leave schools and teacher open to massive complaints.

In my departments for example I have only the one LC class. If they are to be split the other teacher of the subject has only ever had maternity leaves. Who decides who I teach? Who gets to be in the class with their actual teacher and who gets the filler teacher?

And if I’m also used for maths my other subject because they have large classes it’s worse. I haven’t taught senior maths in over five years now. I’m far less on the ball than other teachers. Who decides who gets the experienced teacher who is super on top of the LC syllabus and marking schemes and has taught the class all year?

rainbowtrout

Dylan94 wrote: »

The TUI have put up an FAQ document, which reads as though it was written directly by the DES

https://www.tui.ie/news/state-examinations-2020-frequently-asked-questions-in-the-context-of-covid-19.13735.html

RealJohn wrote: »

I think you’re misrepresenting that FAQ document with that quote, and with the assertion that it reads like “it was written directly by the DES”. I was pleasantly surprised when I read it, perhaps because I’ve been listening to too much doom and gloom around here.

Was just about to post the same thing. The quote is in direct reference to moving the exams to August. The dogs on the street could have said they were moving to August. Dylan94 makes it sound like the whole thing is non negotiable with that selective quote, taken without any context.

rainbowtrout

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

Every school is different but if the July tuition goes ahead we'll have really low attendance for anything other than necessary assessment or project completion.

I would think some students would be afraid of getting the virus before the exams and not risk coming in, unless they have to.

Edit: also the whole-school aspect (one-in-all-in) gives scope to managers to bring in entire staff for full 2 weeks and have them supervising a corner flag for the fortnight if they want

I would say that if there are students who do not come in for two weeks in July because they are afraid of getting the virus, that those same students will not sit the exams in August for the same reasons. And they may well be valid reasons if they have health issues.

It's up to the students and their parents to decide if they are coming in for two weeks in July. We can't make them but assuming things have improved the offer is there. Personally I think a few of my crew will be in the middle of silage season and will only be seen for the exams.