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

The Junior/Leaving Certificate state exams are rubbish

karaokeman

I am only starting university now but there is no question in my mind that the two state exams in secondary school are useless and misleading for young students.

What you learn in secondary school for most subjects is completely irrelevant. In university, what you learn is thought from a different perspective, its thought a different way. I know a girl who hated plants in Biology for the LC and then loved it in university because she had a great lecturer.

And all work you put in for the JC/LC is really not worth the stress of end-of-year exams really. In university marks in second year account to your degree and even for first year what you make out of it accredits to studying abroad in third year.

Secondary school really doesn't prepare you for life in any way or other. It only teaches you how to learn information, cram and pass an exam. What you achieve in university is a gift for life.

If you asked me the British have a much better system with the A-levels. In their system they are "pre-degree" courses, something the LC could never qualify for.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

languagenerd wrote: »

Apologies, I misunderstood. I was asking whether you were replacing the entire course with these novels or adding them in. Variety is a good idea, but even with less detail, I just don't think there's time! Poetry, in particular, takes months even though it's worth the least marks in the end.

Plenty of time. Two years, for heaven's sake. When was the last time it took you two years to read one book?

Why does the poetry take months? A short poem can't take more than a few hours. A long one, a couple of days.

I think the problem here is the same problem with a lot of Leaving Cert syllabusses: the aim is to pass an exam, not to pass on knowledge or appreciation. And in that context, the Leaving Cert is not well rounded.

Nolanger

AgileMyth wrote: »

Whatever about your opinion on Irish you are very wrong about Religion. Rightly or wrongly Religion still shapes the world we live in.

Yep, let's teach kids religion in school and wonder why we have so many IT jobs that can't be filled!

AgileMyth

KungPao wrote: »

Imo, Irish should be a module in Transition Year and nothing else.

Religion should be a transition year module too. like Irish, relatively interesting to be aware of, but ultimately unimportant.

Whatever about your opinion on Irish you are very wrong about Religion. Rightly or wrongly Religion still shapes the world we live in.

languagenerd

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

2 - Strawman argument - I did not say that. Not even close. What I said was more variety in the content. I never once mentioned getting rid of essay writing or poetry -those are your words, not mine. I most certainly did NOT suggest six novels on the same level of detail!! Exactly the opposite, I specifically stated :

Apologies, I misunderstood. I was asking whether you were replacing the entire course with these novels or adding them in. Variety is a good idea, but even with less detail, I just don't think there's time! Poetry, in particular, takes months even though it's worth the least marks in the end.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

languagenerd wrote: »

That's actually ridiculous, I know people who've got As in French while just scraping a pass in Irish! But surely that's down to your school rather than the entire LC system?

So, you're saying that, in order to have a "well-rounded" course, you'd get rid of the poetry, the plays, the essay-writing and the different language styles in favour of just doing novels? Or are you adding in 5 extra novels on top of what's one of the biggest courses? I agree with you that the course isn't perfect, but there just isn't time!

1 - Most definitely so - but hey, I was 15 years old. What the eff did I know?

2 - Strawman argument - I did not say that. Not even close. What I said was more variety in the content. I never once mentioned getting rid of essay writing or poetry -those are your words, not mine. I most certainly did NOT suggest six novels on the same level of detail!! Exactly the opposite, I specifically stated :

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Six or seven novels from different eras and different genres, one every two or three months. Just not as much bloody detail.

languagenerd

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Basically, they wouldn't let me do French because my Irish was poor. I should really have put my foot down in retrospect.

That's actually ridiculous, I know people who've got As in French while just scraping a pass in Irish! But surely that's down to your school rather than the entire LC system?

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Six or seven novels from different eras and different genres, one every two or three months. Just not as much bloody detail.

So, you're saying that, in order to have a "well-rounded" course, you'd get rid of the poetry, the plays, the essay-writing and the different language styles in favour of just doing novels? Or are you adding in 5 extra novels on top of what's one of the biggest courses? I agree with you that the course isn't perfect, but there just isn't time!

Downlinz wrote: »

Not to mention 2-3 weeks less in your summer holidays. Could really do with more because the JC is stressful and is made stressful by teachers and parents. Not really fair to go through that and be expected to start into 5th year 9 weeks later, which is a difficult year where everything really steps up from what you're used to.

Are you serious? 9 weeks isn't enough?!! It's longer than the holidays in many other countries... and if you were working, even the most stressful jobs, you'd only get 4 weeks holidays a year!

[Deleted User]

Okay, super-patronising post alert, even though I do agree in theory that the LC needs a total overhaul in terms of teaching practice and curriculum.

karaokeman wrote: »

I am only starting university now

So how is it that you can comment so much on university level learning? It's not half as idealistic as you seem to think it is.

What you learn in secondary school for most subjects is completely irrelevant.

Not true in my opinion. You might never want to make a budget or work in a shop, but for most people maths is pretty important, if not at least useful in life. I've also used loads of what I learned in music class, home economics, chemistry, biology, geography, Irish and French. And that's even with having only taken Home Ec. and geography to JC level. If you choose not to use any of the skills that have been given to you, that's your choice.

In university, what you learn is thought from a different perspective, its thought a different way.

It's taught.

And all work you put in for the JC/LC is really not worth the stress of end-of-year exams really.

I didn't stress over end-of-year exams at all, it's no one else's fault if you were stressed. Given that it gets people into college and educates them, I would say it is worth the effort.

In university marks in second year account to your degree and even for first year what you make out of it accredits to studying abroad in third year.

That's not the case for all or most university courses. You shouldn't use one course as an example of the entire college experience.

It only teaches you how to learn information, cram and pass an exam. What you achieve in university is a gift for life.

Learning and cramming are skills I've used to their fullest in college, and as for university being a gift for life, it's the LC that got you there so it must be a gift too.

I do agree that second level education needs to have some serious work done to make it a better system, but I think you're not appreciating that secondary school has done a lot for you, it's even what got you into this perfect college experience you seem to love so much.

Downlinz

Junior Cert was the biggest load of rubbish. Having to go through mocks, the stress of everyone talking up a big exam. When your 15 and its your first so called "Big exam" you dont know any better but to assume that this is really important and you should work your ass off for it. Its undue stress for no real reward you realise in years to come looking at the bigger picture.

Not to mention 2-3 weeks less in your summer holidays. Could really do with more because the JC is stressful and is made stressful by teachers and parents. Not really fair to go through that and be expected to start into 5th year 9 weeks later, which is a difficult year where everything really steps up from what you're used to.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Niles wrote: »

Surely it would be quite difficult to fit in numerous texts in the to the timespan (two school years) of the course? I'm not saying it is a bad idea in principle. I studied English in college and I remember there were people who were hard pressed to cover all the set texts (with only one other subject to worry about). I can't see how this would work out in a Leaving Cert situation, possibly fit in one extra text but I'd say any more would be pushing it.

Six or seven novels from different eras and different genres, one every two or three months. Just not as much bloody detail.

Niles

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Basically, they wouldn't let me do French because my Irish was poor. I should really have put my foot down in retrospect.

That's a pity. Seems rather backward thinking on the school's part. The way Irish is taught means that a lot of students struggle with it in ways they don't in other languages, ones ability at Irish need not be indicative of their ability at French, certainly I was better at the latter than the former.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Considering the wealth of literature out there, no it isn't. Why not do a variety of plays and novels instead of just one?

Surely it would be quite difficult to fit in numerous texts in the to the timespan (two school years) of the course? I'm not saying it is a bad idea in principle. I studied English in college and I remember there were people who were hard pressed to cover all the set texts (with only one other subject to worry about). I can't see how this would work out in a Leaving Cert situation, possibly fit in one extra text but I'd say any more would be pushing it.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Most transition year programmes include all those things that you mention: driving, it, etc

Also how did doing Irish stop you doing a foreign language most people do both? Or even do 2 languages and Irish!

Basically, they wouldn't let me do French because my Irish was poor. I should really have put my foot down in retrospect.

languagenerd wrote: »

As for practical skills, I learned a lot of those in TY. Not driving, they couldn't get someone in for that... but we did do personal accounting, I got a qualification in Microsoft Office, I learned how to speak in public, how to cook and sew, and how the legal system works here etc.

But it's not mandatory. Not saying it should be, but a lot of the elements above should be a part of the main curriculum, even if on a non-exam level.

I did LC English from 2007 to 2009 - we studied a Shakespeare play, an Irish play, a novel, a film and six poets - as well as essay-writing, short stories and five styles of writing (aka things like newspaper articles, speeches, letters, reviews.) How you can write that off as "two years studying a single item of literature" I don't know. It was hard to get the course finished, we had to do extra classes before school in the mornings!

Considering the wealth of literature out there, no it isn't. Why not do a variety of plays and novels instead of just one?

What? I did Irish and two foreign languages for LC. No-one does it INSTEAD of one...

Yeah, I explained that at the top, they basically wouldn't let me.

languagenerd

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Completely disagree with the LC being well rounded - it's almost entirely intellectual with very little scope for practicaliy (eg, things like driving, personal accounting, computer litteracy) or creativity. Yes, I know, you could say that these things should be studied outside of school, but why is that when the whole idea of school is to prepare you for life?

I suppose I took a loose definition of well-rounded, but what I meant was that students don't leave school with just a specialist qualification in English and literature, or just Maths, or just Science or whatever. Doing seven diverse subjects does teach you different skills and different methods of learning/thinking. The way you learn languages is completely different from the way you learn Maths, for example.

As for practical skills, I learned a lot of those in TY. Not driving, they couldn't get someone in for that... but we did do personal accounting, I got a qualification in Microsoft Office, I learned how to speak in public, how to cook and sew, and how the legal system works here etc.

Even in the subjects that do offer this, scope is still limited: I did two years of LC English, and did ONE Shakespeare play, ONE Irish play and ONE novel? If you want a well rounded syllabus, bring in a lot more variety and don't waste two years studying a single item of literature.

I did LC English from 2007 to 2009 - we studied a Shakespeare play, an Irish play, a novel, a film and six poets - as well as essay-writing, short stories and five styles of writing (aka things like newspaper articles, speeches, letters, reviews.) How you can write that off as "two years studying a single item of literature" I don't know. It was hard to get the course finished, we had to do extra classes before school in the mornings!

yet still had to do Irish instead of a foreign language. .

What? I did Irish and two foreign languages for LC. No-one does it INSTEAD of one...

StephenHendry

karaokeman wrote: »

I am only starting university now but there is no question in my mind that the two state exams in secondary school are useless and misleading for young students.

What you learn in secondary school for most subjects is completely irrelevant. In university, what you learn is thought from a different perspective, its thought a different way. I know a girl who hated plants in Biology for the LC and then loved it in university because she had a great lecturer.

And all work you put in for the JC/LC is really not worth the stress of end-of-year exams really. In university marks in second year account to your degree and even for first year what you make out of it accredits to studying abroad in third year.

Secondary school really doesn't prepare you for life in any way or other. It only teaches you how to learn information, cram and pass an exam. What you achieve in university is a gift for life.

If you asked me the British have a much better system with the A-levels. In their system they are "pre-degree" courses, something the LC could never qualify for.

i agree that they should certainly look at both, maybe they should be more continuous assessment , certainly there seems to be a big gap to 3rd level where the onus is on the student to take a more DIY approach to learning/studying where from my own experience of the LC is that you are spoonfed most of the time

XxMCRxBabyxX

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

This.
For those who don't go to college, they have a well rounded education. For those who do they are provided with a lot more choice in what they may want to specialise in. No one knows what they want to do at 18. Not properly. The LC gives you a chance to have a better idea

I do think that bringing in a weighting system in the CAO would be a good idea.

I don't see it as outrageous at all tbh.

It is currently a compulsory subject. And nothing to do with the OP. Deal with it.

And you don't have to do religion as an exam subject in the LC

Completely disagree with the LC being well rounded - it's almost entirely intellectual with very little scope for practicaliy (eg, things like driving, personal accounting, computer litteracy) or creativity. Yes, I know, you could say that these things should be studied outside of school, but why is that when the whole idea of school is to prepare you for life?

Even in the subjects that do offer this, scope is still limited: I did two years of LC English, and did ONE Shakespeare play, ONE Irish play and ONE novel? If you want a well rounded syllabus, bring in a lot more variety and don't waste two years studying a single item of literature.

I also disagree that ANY subject should be mandatory after JC. You might not know what you want to do, but you will certainly have an idea of what you don't want to do. When I was that age, I knew I wanted to travel and live abroad, yet still had to do Irish instead of a foreign language. All for the preservation of the language, but that's just stupid.

Most transition year programmes include all those things that you mention: driving, it, etc

Also how did doing Irish stop you doing a foreign language most people do both? Or even do 2 languages and Irish!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

This.
For those who don't go to college, they have a well rounded education. For those who do they are provided with a lot more choice in what they may want to specialise in. No one knows what they want to do at 18. Not properly. The LC gives you a chance to have a better idea

I do think that bringing in a weighting system in the CAO would be a good idea.

I don't see it as outrageous at all tbh.

It is currently a compulsory subject. And nothing to do with the OP. Deal with it.

And you don't have to do religion as an exam subject in the LC

Completely disagree with the LC being well rounded - it's almost entirely intellectual with very little scope for practicaliy (eg, things like driving, personal accounting, computer litteracy) or creativity. Yes, I know, you could say that these things should be studied outside of school, but why is that when the whole idea of school is to prepare you for life?

Even in the subjects that do offer this, scope is still limited: I did two years of LC English, and did ONE Shakespeare play, ONE Irish play and ONE novel? If you want a well rounded syllabus, bring in a lot more variety and don't waste two years studying a single item of literature.

I also disagree that ANY subject should be mandatory after JC. You might not know what you want to do, but you will certainly have an idea of what you don't want to do. When I was that age, I knew I wanted to travel and live abroad, yet still had to do Irish instead of a foreign language. All for the preservation of the language, but that's just stupid.

kincsem

http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/73843-taught-thought.html

Niles

KungPao wrote: »

Slightly OT...but still relevant to the rubbishness of JC/LC...

Can a student at the beginning of 2nd level be exempt from "learning" Irish?

My nephew is Irish, born here, parents from here and all that....but any way he can ditch it?

And Religion for that matter...

??

I went to a CBS, where religion was mandatory in theory. However, there were non-Catholic students, they were not required to participate in religion class, although they did have to attend simply for supervision purposes (they usually did their homework or whatever). There weren't any examples of Catholics not doing religion but I suppose if the parents really didn't want their child to learn it they would have got an exemption.

KungPao wrote: »

Imo, Irish should be a module in Transition Year and nothing else.

Religion should be a transition year module too. like Irish, relatively interesting to be aware of, but ultimately unimportant.

It would be very hard to compress all the complexities of the language into one year...

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

And you do realise that a lot of of the religion course is based on studying other religions? It's not all bout the Catholic religion

Very true. I didn't do exam religion, but even in ordinary religion I distinctly remember learning about Islam in 3rd year.

XxMCRxBabyxX

KungPao wrote: »

Imo, Irish should be a module in Transition Year and nothing else.

Religion should be a transition year module too. like Irish, relatively interesting to be aware of, but ultimately unimportant.

In your opinion....

Personally, I think Irish should be studied.

And you do realise that a lot of of the religion course is based on studying other religions? It's not all bout the Catholic religion

KungPao

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

This.
For those who don't go to college, they have a well rounded education. For those who do they are provided with a lot more choice in what they may want to specialise in. No one knows what they want to do at 18. Not properly. The LC gives you a chance to have a better idea

I do think that bringing in a weighting system in the CAO would be a good idea.

I don't see it as outrageous at all tbh.

It is currently a compulsory subject. And nothing to do with the OP. Deal with it.

And you don't have to do religion as an exam subject in the LC

Imo, Irish should be a module in Transition Year and nothing else.

Religion should be a transition year module too. like Irish, relatively interesting to be aware of, but ultimately unimportant.

XxMCRxBabyxX

languagenerd wrote: »

I think the Irish system produces more well-rounded people, actually. If you do all higher-level subjects, you leave with seven Level 5 qualifications in subjects that could be as wide-ranging as from French to Home Ec to Agricultural Science. The English system forces you to specialize a lot earlier. Many people at age 16 don't know what they want to do with their lives. At least with the LC, you have the option of changing course to something completely different; you're not restricted to a certain faculty or field.

This.
For those who don't go to college, they have a well rounded education. For those who do they are provided with a lot more choice in what they may want to specialise in. No one knows what they want to do at 18. Not properly. The LC gives you a chance to have a better idea

I do think that bringing in a weighting system in the CAO would be a good idea.

KungPao wrote: »

That's fucking outrageous. To think he could be learning a language that isn't a waste of time.

I must ask my sister if he can at least dump Religion...

The education system in this country saddens me.

I don't see it as outrageous at all tbh.

It is currently a compulsory subject. And nothing to do with the OP. Deal with it.

And you don't have to do religion as an exam subject in the LC

KungPao

languagenerd wrote: »

Irish - only if he has a certified learning disability like dyslexia, and if then he'd have to get a special exemption from the Dept of Education.

Religion isn't compulsory, so that depends on the school

That's fucking outrageous. To think he could be learning a language that isn't a waste of time.

I must ask my sister if he can at least dump Religion...

The education system in this country saddens me.

amacca

orourkeda wrote: »

If I was 17 again and I knew what I know now, thre isn;t a f*cking hope in hell i'd go to college

what would you do?

just curious..............................................

learn an in demand trade

take up bass guitar

get an audition for a prestigious theatre company and work your way up the thespian greasepole

take up pimping

start up a human trafficking ring

have reckless sex with multiple partners and write a tell all memoir for a well known redtop to be released in weekly excerpts

ghost write another roy keane autobiography

join the canadian airforce and become a merciless crack fighter pilot ace with at least 12 confirmed kills to your name

run away and join the circus and forge a lifelong friendship with an elephant called membabwe illunga babsisis

become a gourmand extraordinaire

what what...jeebus what?....the suspense is killing me man...dont leave me hanging:eek:? I cant take this!!!

Ficheall

karaokeman wrote: »

I am only starting university now but there is no question in my mind that the two state exams in secondary school are useless and misleading for young students.

I am only starting my eighth year of university now, but there is no question in my mind that the education received in college is useless for young students, and to claim that it is is often quite misleading.
I learned more and still remember more from my secondary school education than from my degree. What I have learned from my phd is largely useless to almost everyone, myself included.

Whilst I think I'd still go back, if I were 17 again, I would enjoy it, and not treat it as though the academia side of it mattered at all.

languagenerd

KungPao wrote: »

Slightly OT...but still relevant to the rubbishness of JC/LC...

Can a student at the beginning of 2nd level be exempt from "learning" Irish?

My nephew is Irish, born here, parents from here and all that....but any way he can ditch it?

And Religion for that matter...

??

Irish - only if he has a certified learning disability like dyslexia, and if then he'd have to get a special exemption from the Dept of Education.

Religion isn't compulsory, so that depends on the school

KungPao

Slightly OT...but still relevant to the rubbishness of JC/LC...

Can a student at the beginning of 2nd level be exempt from "learning" Irish?

My nephew is Irish, born here, parents from here and all that....but any way he can ditch it?

And Religion for that matter...

??

Niles

doovdela wrote: »

It's been ten years since I did my Junior Cert and got the results this day ten years ago. I would make adjustments to the Junior Cert, might be better to scrap it but think its worth doing to prep before the Leaving Cert you are better able to handle State exams by having gone through the system before.

Though it be better if the Junior Cert contributed towards the Leaving Cert in some way regarding assessment or results. Maybe limit the number of Junior Cert subjects be more feasible than scrapping it. I agree the British system is a way better as what you study contributes to qualifying for College courses.

I also think it's worth keeping the Junior Cert as a "dry run" for the Leaving Cert. I see where you're coming from but not sure about making it contribute towards the final results, that's a lot of pressure towards something so "final" at a young age. Might be better to keep the JC as it is which may allow students to find out where their strengths and weaknesses lie before making a decision on Leaving Cert subjects, etc...

Orando Broom wrote: »

The language should be preserved but as a fun, social thing, not in the mode as a points getter, rote learned essays and stock phrases to circumvent the learning process in exchange for points.

+1. Completely agree with this. Ultimately this would probably do the language a lot of good. You could always have an optional "Irish Literature" subject for points on the Leaving, while perhaps retaining a mandatory, but non-examined, spoken language subject (similar to the way there is no PE exam, so far anyway). This way students with a strong aptitude for the language could study Gaelic poems and for points if they wanted to, while at the same time putting less emphasis on exam pressure and more emphasis on instilling a love for the language among those who might otherwise develop a resentment towards it.

Orando Broom

OneArt wrote: »

With regards to language learning secondary school is utterly hopeless. I include Irish in that.

Irish is for the most part a useless language outside a very focused number of career paths, mainly in the perpetuation of itself.

I think the language should be taught as a non examined subject save for an Oral exam. It should be removed from the junior cert as an examined subject.

The language should be preserved but as a fun, social thing, not in the mode as a points getter, rote learned essays and stock phrases to circumvent the learning process in exchange for points.

The critical thing here is the motivation of the teachers. I think a lot of teachers only teach to get points and results and not to instill a love in the subject. One of my favourite teachers (from purely the subject point of view) was an English teacher who I had to Junior Cert. I got a very disappointing result in the subject in relation to the expectations of me. However thanks to the grounding I got from him I went on to do English at University and my love of the language has always remained thanks to him.

starlit

It's been ten years since I did my Junior Cert and got the results this day ten years ago. I would make adjustments to the Junior Cert, might be better to scrap it but think its worth doing to prep before the Leaving Cert you are better able to handle State exams by having gone through the system before.

Though it be better if the Junior Cert contributed towards the Leaving Cert in some way regarding assessment or results. Maybe limit the number of Junior Cert subjects be more feasible than scrapping it. I agree the British system is a way better as what you study contributes to qualifying for College courses.

djcervi

I think the Leaving Cert could be improved a fair bit. It has always surprised me that, in many other EU countries (UK, France, Spain, Italy), you can study subjects like Politics, Psychology and Philosophy. In Ireland, these are not offered for LC. Well, there is CSPE (Junior Cert.), but the main part of that exam is drawing a campaign poster :pac:. You do not analyse Political concepts, or ideas of what makes a good political leader. Likewise, Psychology or Philosophy are not offered, which are interesting subjects to study. Sadly, It's only through studying Languages and Cultural Studies in University, that I've managed to show an appreciation for diverse subjects like Philosophy, etc.

Also I think the main problem is that we can get overwhelmed with the CAO points race, that we can forget about the pleasure of learning. For example, I was not a big fan of LC English. Most of those classes were learning to write essays with a vague idea of what was going on. Since then, I have an urge to read the likes of James Joyce and Oscar Wilde. I don't think my 18 year old self could have imagined that.

Just my two cents.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

tony 2 tone wrote: »

Awww bless! A first year college student who thinks he knows every thing

Are you referring to the OP or to Rauri Quinn???