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

Rosita wrote: »

How do you know what her mark was in the oral last year? I'm an LC oral examiner confidentiality of marks is very strict.

Last year they were given exact breakdowns for the first time. It was on their online account.

It’s one of the reasons there was an increase in candidates seeking an appeal. They knew exactly how close to the next grade they were and sought appeals on that basis. Obviously, their individual written and oral examiners did not know candidates had been left on a borderline, but a candidate left 1/2 marks off a grade would know it, and appealed as a result.

The speculation in the media is unfair and political. It doesn’t serve exam candidates at all.

bren2001

Rosita wrote: »

As was pointed out here by a few people the other day the government was very sloppy in not referencing the LC in that statement. I would assume that a Plan B would be part of any discussion but a poorly configured statement has brought that to the fore. Prof Gary Murphy of DCU said yesterday on Radio 1 that they had been advised that under proposed social distancing they had been advised that a 240 seat lecture theatre could hold only 24 people. If that's a general guide (as distinct from DCU's own supposition) then it's hard to imagine any LC taking place and even harder to imagine the school scenario in September not being chaotic and largely on-line based still.

That's a 240 tiered lecture theatre. The tiering introduces a 3rd dimension into the equation i.e. the vertical and this significantly alters the numbers. However, a flat room would still suffer from a significant reduction in capacity.

This number assumes no alteration to the lecture theatre. There are workarounds however, installing plexiglass between desks for example could increase the capacity of a room etc.

I would suspect capacity exists in Dublin for exams quite easily if you factor in the RDS, conference centre, hotel ballrooms etc. but may be problematic in more remote locations. It also requires an increase in invigilators. A solution needs to be found here. The Department have said they are assessing this already.

Mardy Bum

I'd be mindful of articles related to the LC in the paper. They are mostly attempts to sell more papers. The industry is in a precarious situation.

km79

Mardy Bum wrote: »

I'd be mindful of articles related to the LC in the paper. They are mostly attempts to sell more papers. The industry is in a precarious situation.

They are not making the quotes from the politicians up
Some of these quotes have been silly and poorly advised
I question some of the motives of some of the more recent ones however

Millionaire only not wrote: »

We are quiet aware of your qualifications, who am I to question your judgement.
What was u said yesterday,
An implied part of the task in the exam is seeing if you have the judgement and nerve under stress.

Let the people here make up there own mind on the attitude of the examiner’s answers .!

Vey good. Now that you've gotten that out of your system maybe you'd deal with the question I asked please. You said that your daughter got full marks in the oral Irish exam last year. My question is how do you know what her mark was in the oral last year?

Mardy Bum wrote: »

I'd be mindful of articles related to the LC in the paper. They are mostly attempts to sell more papers. The industry is in a precarious situation.

I'd imagine there's something in them more often than you think. Education correspondents in newspapers will have their contacts. The Connaught Telegraph reported that it was planned to close schools a week before it happened. So I'd imagine the national newspapers are even more on the ball.

Random sample wrote: »

The speculation in the media is unfair and political. It doesn’t serve exam candidates at all.

Arguably it does serve them in the sense that it at least conveys the unease that is likely to be there among students at the sense of drift on the issue.

lulublue22

I think the whole situation is a shambles. As the parent of a relatively good LC student ( who was on target to achieve his first choice)I’m shocked and upset at how hard he is finding adjusting to online learning. I can’t fault the school they are doing their best. He is just really really struggling to stay motivated and on top of things. This type of learning doesn't seem to suit him at all in contrast to his less academic non exam year sibling who has taken to it like a duck to water.

I feel for this years LC . I’m not a fan of predicted grades at all but the thoughts of LC sitting the exams after nearly 4 months out of school doesn't fill me with confidence either. (Provided they go ahead.)

At the moment the choice seems to be between 2 equally problematic scenarios.

Rosita wrote: »

Arguably it does serve them in the sense that it at least conveys the unease that is likely to be there among students at the sense of drift on the issue.

I don’t see the point in the minister continually announcing ‘the plan hasn’t changed’. Without speculation, the last piece of information we got was that a timetable would be made available in June. That should be the end of it until June. We are a month off that now, and the minister is being put under pressure to make announcements. That’s not good for students.

km79

Random sample wrote: »

I don’t see the point in the minister continually announcing ‘the plan hasn’t changed’. Without speculation, the last piece of information we got was that a timetable would be made available in June. That should be the end of it until June. We are a month off that now, and the minister is being put under pressure to make announcements. That’s not good for students.

Being under pressure by the health minister flippantly talking about schools reopening , his Taoiseach mentioning predictive grades and an education roadmap with no mention of the Leaving Cert
As has been said previously when I called for clarity it is an evolving situation
It has joe evolved into an almost untenable situation for teachers and parents of LC students. Mixed messages every side
He has to lay out how he sees the current LC proposal working as many people don’t think it will
He needs to do that sooner rather than later

brighterspark

Recent announcements by political parties are the result of politicians at last listening to parents, students and many teachers.

Minister McHugh has stated that by waiting till early June to release the timetable he will have a better picture of the health situation. This is patent nonsense – no one knows what the situation will be on 29th of July - to quote Dr Holohan when asked about an American football match in late August (which I appreciate is not the same as exams!)

“All I would be doing is speculating in relation to where we would be at the end of August.”

Is this also not very likely to have been the advice Minister McHugh would have also received regarding August?
Is it fair or reasonable to ask our students to continue to study for an examination that might not happen? No matter what, the doubt and speculation will continue throughout the summer, new outbreaks are very likely hence the need for continued testing. How is anybody supposed to block that all out and continue on regardless?
Many commentaries I have read on students favouring predicted grades, seem to take the position that they are somehow looking ‘an easy way out’. I find this a very insulting way to regard our young adult’s legitimate opinion. What it reflects is students’ confidence in our professionalism and that their teachers do indeed know them well and should be able to fairly and accurately carry out this task.

What we can be certain of is that no one knows if it will be possible to have these exams so how can we expect our students to obtain the results that reflect academic ability - they are more likely to be a reflection of mental resilience and level of parental support !

Random sample wrote: »

I don’t see the point in the minister continually announcing ‘the plan hasn’t changed’. Without speculation, the last piece of information we got was that a timetable would be made available in June.

It's an awful pity nobody told LV that so, when he fueled the fire all over again by mentioning predicted grades on the bloody LLS.

deiseindublin wrote: »

It's an awful pity nobody told LV that so, when he fueled the fire all over again by mentioning predicted grades on the bloody LLS.

Oh I agree. That shouldn’t have happened. And Simon Harris shouldn’t have been talking about getting schools back either. But I think we have to take the plan at face value for now, and leave it at that.

I am taking it at face value, but media are in a spin all over again with the pair of them.

JPF82

How much longer will Joe McHugh be Minister for Education anyway? Whenever we get a new Government agreed he might be gone. I feel so sorry for my Leaving Cert class at the moment. So much speculation in the media. It is hard for them to filter it out and stay focused.

Mardy Bum

Rosita wrote: »

I'd imagine there's something in them more often than you think. Education correspondents in newspapers will have their contacts. The Connaught Telegraph reported that it was planned to close schools a week before it happened. So I'd imagine the national newspapers are even more on the ball.

There have been articles about the GAA being in discussion with the government to get the special dispensations for training and such like and this was flat out denied by the GAA's president.

There is one useful education correspondent and she works with RTE. The rest are mouth pieces.

Random sample wrote: »

I don’t see the point in the minister continually announcing ‘the plan hasn’t changed’.

I take your point totally but Varadker still should have clarified it in his recent address. It is astonishing this didn't occur to the speech-writer. And Harris should not have gone on a solo run about LCs back in school in May if they want to avoid having to clarify things haven't changed.

Harris and Varadker are going around like two student public speakers at the moment, really seeming to be intoxicated with the non-adversarial spotlight and are far too prone to loose comments.

bren2001

Rosita wrote: »

I take your point totally but Varadker still should have clarified it in his recent address. It is astonishing this didn't occur to the speech-writer. And Harris should not have gone on a solo run about LCs back in school in May if they want to avoid having to clarify things haven't changed.

Harris and Varadker are going around like two student public speakers at the moment, really seeming to be intoxicated with the non-adversarial spotlight and are far too prone to loose comments.

I've read a lot of posts from people saying it should have been in the roadmap or Leo should have addressed it directly. I don't agree with that sentiment at all, at the end of the day, it effects around 55k people. That's a really small number. Leos speech and the roadmap are to outline how things would progress for the majority. I don't see any justification for it being included in the document or in the speech. There was nothing on other examinations set to take place.

The amount of airspace this is getting is insane. This is not the governments doing, it's the medias and other political parties trying to make political gains.

So, LV mentioning predictive grading on LLS was a good move, and it's all the media's fault?

Treppen

JPF82 wrote: »

How much longer will Joe McHugh be Minister for Education anyway? Whenever we get a new Government agreed he might be gone. I feel so sorry for my Leaving Cert class at the moment. So much speculation in the media. It is hard for them to filter it out and stay focused.

June at least before New government

rainbowtrout

JPF82 wrote: »

How much longer will Joe McHugh be Minister for Education anyway? Whenever we get a new Government agreed he might be gone. I feel so sorry for my Leaving Cert class at the moment. So much speculation in the media. It is hard for them to filter it out and stay focused.

Whether Joe is there or not won't make a whole lot of difference. The same stakeholders will still be sitting around the table making the decisions.

I agree with bren2001, there was no need to include the LC in the roadmap. It's a specific event, and it was accounted for already. It was made quite clear that there would be no further information until early June. The media are constantly pushing for something to print so are writing about the Leaving Cert every day. The newspapers couldn't give a toss if the students are studying or not, they just want something to write about so are stirring shit.

bren2001

deiseindublin wrote: »

So, LV mentioning predictive grading on LLS was a good move, and it's all the media's fault?

I never suggested that.

man_no_plan

In fairness an American football game with over 50,000 people at it and running the LC with maybe 300 students in a very big school are two very different things. Many schools would have under 100 candidates and finding them or 12 rooms for that number is hardly an issue.

The SEC need to worry about the timetable, recruitment of superintendents, examiners etc.

The DES and Dept of Health need to worry about issuing guidelines for social distancing etc.

Principals will need to worry about getting the exam rooms set up according to guidelines along with caretakers and other staff.

LC teachers need to worry about making sure everything is covered and that there's some outline of a study plan to keep topping up between now and July.

LC students need to worry about following their teachers advice.

LC parents need to try their best to keep positive, at least outwardly, and encourage their children on. You are as worried as teachers are but not everything has to be shared. By teachers or parents. Many LC students can't see past their nose, they're young, that's the way we all were. The only reason they're stressed is because we all keep telling them they should be!

Politicians, including Leo and Simon, need to get their finger out and form a government, cut the nonsense and loose talk. Focus on the facts.

If everyone did their own thing instead of worrying about what everyone else should be doing there'd be far less fuss and we'd actually see progress.

deiseindublin wrote: »

So, LV mentioning predictive grading on LLS was a good move, and it's all the media's fault?

bren2001 wrote: »

I never suggested that.

bren2001 wrote: »

The amount of airspace this is getting is insane. This is not the governments doing, it's the medias and other political parties trying to make political gains.

You said it was not the Gov's fault and media and other parties were at fault? Surely, the Gov includes LV fueling the fire on the LLS?

Mardy Bum

deiseindublin wrote: »

You said it was not the Gov's fault and media and other parties were at fault? Surely, the Gov includes LV fueling the fire on the LLS?

The media have given every student with a Twitter account and their aunts a voice on the LC. Consider for comparison sakes the amount of teacher voice in the media over the last ten years.

Media institutions want to seem relevant to young people (potential customers) so they are pushing this every day. I didn't see the LLS but I imagine it was Tubridy who asked him the question.

bren2001 wrote: »

I've read a lot of posts from people saying it should have been in the roadmap or Leo should have addressed it directly. I don't agree with that sentiment at all, at the end of the day, it effects around 55k people. That's a really small number. Leos speech and the roadmap are to outline how things would progress for the majority. I don't see any justification for it being included in the document or in the speech. There was nothing on other examinations set to take place.

The amount of airspace this is getting is insane. This is not the governments doing, it's the medias and other political parties trying to make political gains.

I can't believe that you would cite the number of people involved as a reason not to mention the Leaving Cert given the prominence it has had in the whole conversation around the Coronavirus restrictions in the past eight weeks. The suggestion that since only 55,000 people are affected and that this makes it a relatively unimportant issue utterly misses the context. The Coronavirus is the only show in town for the politicians and the media at the moment and the Leaving Cert has an exaggerated prominence as a result. You might not like that but that exaggerated prominence is a fact.

Yes, a decision was arrived at and announced regarding the Leaving Cert. It should be said that the (necessarily) limited nature of the announcement at the time (lack of detail and timetable etc.) created a gap for speculation. So that was never quite going away.

Remember that just one month ago (2nd April) Varadker stated that plans were in train to ensure that the Leaving Cert and Junior Cert exams would go ahead "by hook or by crook". Since then the latter has gone up in smoke. So the government has a credibility deficit on the issue and that will fuel speculation too.

The more immediate problem for that speech the other day is that when Varadker was speaking he announced that the schools not opening until September. Since he was specifically referencing schools at all he was very badly advised not to clarify once more that the arrangements for the LC stood. Given the doubts many have about the state of things over the coming months people will inevitably speculate and discuss the matter. And yes the amount of airspace it's getting is the government's doing. They are the ones with control of their message.

Discussion boards discuss, the print media writes, the broadcast media talks. That's what they do. You are posting here so you are part of that yourself. It's a perfectly natural thing for matters to be discussed. If the government want to exert more influence over what is discussed, written about and talked about then they should not leave such strings to pull. One simple sentence - "the Leaving Cert will proceed as already announced" would have averted all of this. The buck stops with Varadker on that.