How will schools be able to go back in September?

Good insight of covid cases in Ireland released by CSO today, goes into quite a lot of detail.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/br/b-cdc/covid-19deathsandcases/

tigger123

pwurple wrote: »

Cool story. Here's another one. I had an English teacher who spent two years trying to push me down to ordinary level. I was a huge fan of contemporary abstract literature at the time and she didn't like my writing style I think. I didn't get grinds, but I did get a B1 in higher level English in the LC. She was at the school when we got our results and told me it must be a mistake as I couldn't possibly have gotten that grade.

I wouldn't have wanted her grading my leaving cert, that's for damn sure.

I had a similar experience in Higher Leaving Cert English. I got on great with all of my teachers, but my English teacher couldn't stand the sight of me for some reason. Ended up with a B1 in spite of him.

The idea of him deciding my grade is a pretty scary thought.

Has anyone thought about how this will effect the failure rate? How many fails are going to be dolled out this year on a predictive basis? If it's done on a bell curve for the school, surely a similar amount will have to be given in 2020 as there were in previous years... ?

khalessi

Yeah the INTO put forward a very good document of suggestions too

kandr10

If a lot of the above was clarified it would definitely go along way to putting plans in place and being able to communicate them with parents. I’d say it’s a nightmare of a time for principals.

A reasonable and balanced submission by the IPPN. There is a very clear outline here of what is required.

1. Clear guidance in relation to all of the issues, challenges and concerns outlined below needs to be provided to all schools as soon as possible. Ideally it would be available online, so that the most up-to-date information is available when it is needed, and that it reflects current best practice. The most critical guidance relates to the protection of all members of the school community and the procedures and resources needed to ensure same.
2. Additional funding must be provided to schools up front to enable them to implement the guidelines in full. In addition, the centralised procurement and distribution to all schools of appropriate and sufficient PPE equipment and materials prior to their full reopening in the Autumn would greatly alleviate schools of a significant burden over the summer months.
3. Support must be given to schools in managing the full reopening of their buildings to staff and pupils - it must be a collaborative, rather than an inspection-based approach
4. Additional leadership and management time to be provided to teaching principals to flexibly meet the needs of the school. Some teaching principals may prefer to have additional support to focus on administration, so they can spend more time in the classroom - flexibility is the key here
5. Training of all staff must be provided prior to reopening - so everyone has the same information at the same time. Additional training of caretaking and cleaning staff is also required
6. No school should lose a staff member owing to COVID-19 e.g. parental decision to keep children at home/defer their child's start in junior infants
7. A checklist for schools - incorporating key short-term, medium-term and long-term actions - would be very helpful
8. A 'General Contract' to be provided centrally for all parents for the new school year to accept the new terms and conditions that balance the safety of the school community with their child's right to an education
9. No new initiatives can be introduced in primary schools in the 2020/21 school year - to respect school staff who must prioritise getting their schools up and running in very changed circumstances - this will be sufficiently challenging for the next school year
10. Inspections should be paused until at least January 2021. The role of inspectors should be temporarily changed to support schools to get back up and running and to restore normality.

joseywhales

Mrsmum wrote: »

There's an example to prove every and any case though. Some students and their parents learn the hard way after going against teacher's advice and for some it goes the opposite way. At the end of the day teachers teach and parents parent and neither should be derided for doing their jobs.

From my experience you can get nearly anyone through a LC higher level exam if they put enough time in, that's the issue. There are ways of doing these exams where it's more exam craft than subject matter knowledge, if you force students to memorize in English for example, they can regurgitate prepared writing for almost all sections, even comprehension of new material, they can have prepared blurbs for general subject matter. Languages are even easier, much less depth than an English exam. Math involves years of consistent homework but the hard sciences are less in depth again. You can program these kids to a certain degree if they are dedicated.

daydorunrun

This subject needs a new thread or perhaps there’s already one it’s more suited to.
Nothing to do with September and schools returning.

blueberrypie wrote: »

Not aware of Colm O Rourkes issue with unions.
I heard something about a GAA player/teacher in his school wanting a week off to go on a sun holiday/team bonding week. He had a huge issue with this, even with his stong GAA connection.

I read his column in the Sunday Indo.
He comes across as anti teacher, anti-student, anti-parent and anti-union.

Essentially anything that makes his life as a principal anyway different and difficult.

Treppen wrote: »

You do know why Colm is so bitter against the unions right?

Why?

blueberrypie

Not aware of Colm O Rourkes issue with unions.
I heard something about a GAA player/teacher in his school wanting a week off to go on a sun holiday/team bonding week. He had a huge issue with this, even with his stong GAA connection.

I read his column in the Sunday Indo.
He comes across as anti teacher, anti-student, anti-parent and anti-union.

Mrsmum

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Ohh I agree with the majority of what you say, can't blame parents for wanting the best for their child. I'm more so referring to the parents who aren't realistic about their childs ability when it comes to exams or just their academic ability overall. I was talking to a friend of a friend recently and they were saying that they have a child in HL french who they would prefer and recommend to take ordinary level. However the childs mother has paid out a fortune on grinds to try and bring the childs level up but it just isn't there and they won't accept the viewpoint of the actual teacher because the grinds person says they can get a good HL result. Grinds person has been laughing all the way to bank while the child will likely get a very poor result and wasted time on it.

There's an example to prove every and any case though. Some students and their parents learn the hard way after going against teacher's advice and for some it goes the opposite way. At the end of the day teachers teach and parents parent and neither should be derided for doing their jobs.

pwurple wrote: »

Cool story. Here's another one. I had an English teacher who spent two years trying to push me down to ordinary level. I was a huge fan of contemporary abstract literature at the time and she didn't like my writing style I think. I didn't get grinds, but I did get a B1 in higher level English in the LC. She was at the school when we got our results and told me it must be a mistake as I couldn't possibly have gotten that grade.

I wouldn't have wanted her grading my leaving cert, that's for damn sure.

Sure everyone has a story. I was told to drop to pass level for LC tech drawing back in the day . Got an A1 in the end but that was because it just clicked for me in the end.

Stories like these are why teachers don't want predicted/calculated grades.

Treppen

sideswipe wrote: »

Disgusting what the ASTI are doing by not accepting a state indemnity in relation to LC grading. These are emergency times and it needs everyone to pull together. Colm O’Rourke saying on tv they have a policy of opposition, imagine if our frontline workers took this kind of stance when so much was asked of them during this pandemic.

You do know why Colm is so bitter against the unions right?

pwurple

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Ohh I agree with the majority of what you say, can't blame parents for wanting the best for their child. I'm more so referring to the parents who aren't realistic about their childs ability when it comes to exams or just their academic ability overall. I was talking to a friend of a friend recently and they were saying that they have a child in HL french who they would prefer and recommend to take ordinary level. However the childs mother has paid out a fortune on grinds to try and bring the childs level up but it just isn't there and they won't accept the viewpoint of the actual teacher because the grinds person says they can get a good HL result. Grinds person has been laughing all the way to bank while the child will likely get a very poor result and wasted time on it.

Cool story. Here's another one. I had an English teacher who spent two years trying to push me down to ordinary level. I was a huge fan of contemporary abstract literature at the time and she didn't like my writing style I think. I didn't get grinds, but I did get a B1 in higher level English in the LC. She was at the school when we got our results and told me it must be a mistake as I couldn't possibly have gotten that grade.

I wouldn't have wanted her grading my leaving cert, that's for damn sure.

Higgins5473

Mrsmum wrote: »

Sorry but I see this type of wording used over and over and it gets on my nerves. Imo it is the duty of "mammies & daddies" to do their very best for their children and that sometimes involves taking a matter as far as they feel it needs to go. That girl last year that sued and got her situation resolved in her favour happened because her "mammy and daddy" didn't roll over. And can I just say I have teachers in my own family, as in laws and as friends and believe you me as "mammies and daddies" themselves, no one is as all over it and quicker to move heaven and earth to get their children sorted. I don't think for one minute that teachers should be legally liable in this situation but neither do I like this scorn for parents being parents.

You should probably change your username if you find that offensive.

It’s used for those that are problematic parents, of which there are plenty. It’s the mammies and daddies of the students that haven’t done a tap of work that will shout the loudest about their child not getting what they deserved.

Mrsmum wrote: »

Sorry but I see this type of wording used over and over and it gets on my nerves. Imo it is the duty of "mammies & daddies" to do their very best for their children and that sometimes involves taking a matter as far as they feel it needs to go. That girl last year that sued and got her situation resolved in her favour happened because her "mammy and daddy" didn't roll over. And can I just say I have teachers in my own family, as in laws and as friends and believe you me as "mammies and daddies" themselves, no one is as all over it and quicker to move heaven and earth to get their children sorted. I don't think for one minute that teachers should be legally liable in this situation but neither do I like this scorn for parents being parents.

Ohh I agree with the majority of what you say, can't blame parents for wanting the best for their child. I'm more so referring to the parents who aren't realistic about their childs ability when it comes to exams or just their academic ability overall. I was talking to a friend of a friend recently and they were saying that they have a child in HL french who they would prefer and recommend to take ordinary level. However the childs mother has paid out a fortune on grinds to try and bring the childs level up but it just isn't there and they won't accept the viewpoint of the actual teacher because the grinds person says they can get a good HL result. Grinds person has been laughing all the way to bank while the child will likely get a very poor result and wasted time on it.

Mrsmum

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

mammy and daddy can't/won't accept the result.

Sorry but I see this type of wording used over and over and it gets on my nerves. Imo it is the duty of "mammies & daddies" to do their very best for their children and that sometimes involves taking a matter as far as they feel it needs to go. That girl last year that sued and got her situation resolved in her favour happened because her "mammy and daddy" didn't roll over. And can I just say I have teachers in my own family, as in laws and as friends and believe you me as "mammies and daddies" themselves, no one is as all over it and quicker to move heaven and earth to get their children sorted. I don't think for one minute that teachers should be legally liable in this situation but neither do I like this scorn for parents being parents.

annoyedgal wrote: »

Actually incredulous that some posters wouldn't fully inform themselves before jumping on the nearest bandwagon for yet another teacher bashing oppoutunity.
The ASTI are protecting their members from inevitable legal challenges which could financially ruin the teachers involved.
Clearly this issue will be resolved and the ASTI have shown they are absolutely willing to engage in predictive grading which will happen once this is resolved.
As another poster said I'm embarrassed for some posters here with the comments they have posted. Read more than the headline people!

I'm also imaging that some people just saw the headline on the 9 o'clock news last night and jumped straight on boards to give out. The actual segment gave further information but the actual headline that they led with was pure tabloid nonsense. Whatever producer put that together was an idiot.

annoyedgal

Actually incredulous that some posters wouldn't fully inform themselves before jumping on the nearest bandwagon for yet another teacher bashing oppoutunity.
The ASTI are protecting their members from inevitable legal challenges which could financially ruin the teachers involved.
Clearly this issue will be resolved and the ASTI have shown they are absolutely willing to engage in predictive grading which will happen once this is resolved.
As another poster said I'm embarrassed for some posters here with the comments they have posted. Read more than the headline people!

PowerToWait

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

They are both asking to be indemnified against legal repercussions in order to allow them to do their job.

The state has agreed to indemnify teachers and schools and have spent weeks ironing out the detail alongside unions and representative bodies.

The state will not indemnify a childcare solution for frontline workers. Do you see them now refusing to do their job?

It’s not the job of teachers to decide LC grades. But as you insist on repeating non-stop, these are extraordinary times.

Your comparison with healthcare workers is the dumbest thing I’ve seen this week.

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

They are both asking to be indemnified against legal repercussions in order to allow them to do their job.

The state has agreed to indemnify teachers and schools and have spent weeks ironing out the detail alongside unions and representative bodies.

The state will not indemnify a childcare solution for frontline workers. Do you see them now refusing to do their job?

Look one union has legal advice that says it is not water tight. Isn't it best to get that sorted rather than leave teachers wide open rather than being left to partially foot the cost of any legal action taken?

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

They are both asking to be indemnified against legal repercussions in order to allow them to do their job.

The state has agreed to indemnify teachers and schools and have spent weeks ironing out the detail alongside unions and representative bodies.

The state will not indemnify a childcare solution for frontline workers. Do you see them now refusing to do their job?

I’ll ask the same question again. Are they both looking for indemnity against the same possibility? Please try and answer the question this time so we can fully understand the point you are attempting to make.

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

And unions (only one of them BTW) oppose it because that's their default.

I've no skin in this game as I'm primary but the TUI are well known as total walk overs. They pretty much rollover and ask for their belly to be tickle by the Govt such is their haste to accept everything that they throw their way. Never really question or query things. Fair play to the the ASTI for looking after their members. That is what they are there for.

downthemiddle wrote: »

Are they both asking to be indemnified against the same possibility?

They are both asking to be indemnified against legal repercussions in order to allow them to do their job.

The state has agreed to indemnify teachers and schools and have spent weeks ironing out the detail alongside unions and representative bodies.

The state will not indemnify a childcare solution for frontline workers. Do you see them now refusing to do their job?

plodder

I don't envy secondary teachers going through this LC grading process. It's a minefield and anyone who engages with it honestly and in good faith should be 100% indemnified.

On a different point, I saw this piece in the IT

Our warped sense of perspective bodes ill for Ireland's economy

Sooner or later we are going to have to face the reality of what this is costing us, and we will have to get serious about re-opening the economy, including schools.

Mrsmum

downthemiddle wrote: »

No teacher should be responsible for any of their legal costs for the situation they find themselves in.

I think any reasonable person would agree with that.

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

Teachers union - we don't let our members engage because your state indemnity is not enough.

Frontline essential workers - no state indemnity for you (continues to do job).

I think you'll agree that there's not much of a comparison between LC grading and the work that frontline workers have had to contend with over the past few months and yet the disparity is there.

And unions (only one of them BTW) oppose it because that's their default.

Are they both asking to be indemnified against the same possibility?

downthemiddle wrote: »

Could you please expand on this point so people can understand the comparison you are trying to make?

Teachers union - we don't let our members engage because your state indemnity is not enough.

Frontline essential workers - no state indemnity for you (continues to do job).

I think you'll agree that there's not much of a comparison between LC grading and the work that frontline workers have had to contend with over the past few months and yet the disparity is there.

And unions (only one of them BTW) oppose it because that's their default.

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

No but they can't get childcare due to a lack of state indemnity.

Could you please expand on this point so people can understand the comparison you are trying to make?