rainbowtrout wrote: » Yes they can. Almost 10.9% of students failed OL Maths last year. That's pretty run of the mill for OL Maths. They're not just going to pass everyone this year. The repercussions are very real for the student that fails maths, but it happens every year. Why would management raise eyebrows at giving lower than 30%. If you have a student that is not able to get 30% then they don't deserve 30%. If they got higher than deserved that's grade inflation. If every school in the country did that and didn't fail anyone in Maths then there will have to be downgrades. Same for every other subject.
Smacruairi wrote: » Fails in the system though usually come from someone making a hames of it, or cracking under pressure, or being ill or whatever. Very very rarely from failing all year and doing the test anyway. It can happen but I've never seen it bar once. That's why fails will be underrepresented and should be allowed to be underrepresented. You can't calculate someone will crack.
am_zarathustra wrote: » Absolutely, I failed a student in maths.i hadn't a piece of paper over two years that indicated they might even pass on their best day. I would have been lying had I said otherwise and it would be a disservice to the kids I know killed themselves to get their 45 or 52%
emilymemily wrote: » It's just unfair that had the students known not doing their work in school, not handing up their homework and not studying for tests was going to mean they fail their leaving cert, they might have tried a bit harder during the school term. Obviously not your fault but hard luck on the students all the same.
Smacruairi wrote: » So if they don't use their original algorithm to adjust... What are they going to use?comparison to the jc results? I just can't see them doing anything else other than school profiling which is what the blatantly admitted to earlier on. Is gender still on the cards?
rainbowtrout wrote: » Why is it hard luck on the student?Why is it unfair? If they didn't do any work for two years, why would failing a subject come as a surprise?
rainbowtrout wrote: » Probably a bit of everything. Taking the maths stats as an example, let's say for arguments sake that only 1% of students were given a fail grade by teachers in comparison with the typical 11% that failed last year. The most obvious thing would then be to drop all the students that have been awarded 40% by teachers and see what percentage are now on a fail. I would imagine that there are a fair cohort of students on a 40/41 in OL subjects, particularly maths, given by teachers who refused to fail a student and decided they would let the DES do the job instead. If that doesn't bring enough students down, then you move down the ones on 42, 43 etc, until you get to ~10% failure rate. My gut feeling is that you probably wouldn't need to go as far as 43, that there will probably be a glut of grades on the 40/41 mark - and the same on 30/31 in HL subjects. Once you have your regular failure rate (and all the other grades have been shifted to match the typical curve) for the subject. Then you can start the profiling aspect of it and see how it matches up for schools and/or gender, JC results.
Smacruairi wrote: » Yeah can understand that, but does anything so arbitrary stand up to an appeal? None of it makes sense to be fair. Oh DES, you so funny you. I really think that students union calling for predicted grades needs to be tackled on their role in this, and follow the money to see who was advising them in being manipulated to whip up a frenzy.
emilymemily wrote: » It's just unfair that had the students known not doing their work in school, not handing up their homework and not studying for tests was going to mean they fail their leaving cert, they might have tried a bit harder during the school term.
mirrorwall14 wrote: » So when is everyone back? And is the building ready? We’re Monday. First group in within tutor groups on Monday for meeting. Building is currently nowhere near ready but there is a lot being done
rainbowtrout wrote: » We haven’t been provided with a timetable yet. We don’t know if any PPE has arrived for us. Our school is a building site at the moment so some rooms and entrances are now out of bounds. Our principal has signed up the school for some RTÉ programme on the reopening of schools during the pandemic.
amacca wrote: » How do you feel about that out of curiosity. If it was me I'd be like FFS its not as if school doesnt have enough to do without the extra of guiding the national TV stations people around the school etc.
Rosita wrote: » It's not unfair. Teachers are always joining the dots for students between consistent effort and positive outcomes. It's not like we're withholding this information and students are ambushed by it later. It's a teacher mantra to the point of cliché.
Icsics wrote: » I think that Principal in Carlow might regret inviting in RTE to film her assembly, 150 in the hall for prayers!
rainbowtrout wrote: » When did that happen?
Mardy Bum wrote: » The desperation for positive self PR from some principals is nauseating.
rainbowtrout wrote: » FYP.
scrubs33 wrote: » The managerial body for the school have been tweeting their praise for the organisation of the event etc. I really don’t see what everyone else is worried about. Can do attitude goes a long way; even as far as stopping a virus. We all need to follow this lead...
rainbowtrout wrote: » Well they're hardly going to say their own work is a shitshow are they? We've been discussing here for weeks how kids are going to fit into classrooms safely, what precautions have been put in place etc, public gatherings are essentially a no-no at the moment, but they can have a gathering of 150+ people? How do they go about justifying that when we've been told not to have all staff together in the one place for staff meetings? It's not about a can do attitude, there are guidelines there and they are being followed or they're not.
Mardy Bum wrote: » The desperation for positive PR from some principals is nauseating.
