maynooth_rules wrote: » I am a young part time teacher. This is about showing solidarity with your colleagues and not being a scab.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » Please refer back to the question I posted . Gone way off topic!
doc11 wrote: » If your a young (potential) teacher you have already been thrown under the bus. There was little solidarity when allowances removed and paycuts introduced for new colleagues. Even extending the PGDE to a 2 year masters making teaching out of reach for the working class. Unions didn't care. Everyone is out to feather there own nest, scab or otherwise.
Armelodie wrote: » If you are engaging with learning outcomes and assessment (in line with JCSA ) aren't you going against a union directive?
Armelodie wrote: » If you dont recognise the importance of that stepping stone and its educational purpose then youare missing the point. Since when was the junior cert meant as a training program for the world of work at 15-16 years of age anyway? Its about education... not providing economic units for factories.
endakenny wrote: » It may have been argued in the past that the abolition of the Primary Cert would leave pupils unprepared for secondary education but that fear didn't materialise. The same logic applies to the transition from JCSA to LC.
Benicetomonty wrote: » Even as prep for the Leaving Cert, the Junior Cert has worth and makes it more than a house exam as far as a stepping stone is concerned. Everything about it as it is currently prepares a student for the Leaving Certificate exam, which most would argue is an important factor. Decision makers make mistakes, and they get challenged in democracies. Do you believe Irish Water has been well thought out? The same crowd are in charge. Re: selfishness, I'll quite happily admit that as an English teacher, I resent the fact that I'll have to do more work over the school calender for the next few years (without payment) than many of my colleagues who teach different subjects that haven't yet been phased in (and may not be for several years.)
amacca wrote: » I'm not so sure the same logic applies at all….Ive seen many a student who benefitted greatly from the rude awakening the JC gave them …where no amount of advice or warnings succeded beforehand…the stark reality of the result gave them a good insight into just what was really required to avoid a repeat performance in the Leaving Cert. I've also seen it motivate and increase the confidence of weaker students who were rewarded for their hard work. I suppose the opposite could be true for another cohort of students but on balance I felt it did a lot less harm than good.
endakenny wrote: » If they didn't do well at Higher Level subjects in the JC then they won't do well at Higher Level subjects in the LC. Surely, house exams and mock exams prepare them for JC exams. Furthermore, there will still be terminal exams in the JCSA. Therefore, they will be prepared for the LC. The JCSA will have the Department's logo on the cert. Therefore, it will be a (sort of ) State certificate.
A School Certificate of Learning which will state the grades achieved by the student in the subjects and short courses that they complete. There will be five grade points – Not achieved (0 – 39%), Achieved (40 – 54%), Achieved with Merit (55 – 74%), Achieved with Higher Merit (75 – 89%) and Achieved with Distinction (90 – 100%).
rainbowtrout wrote: » I can see a lot of students ending up getting 'Achieved' grades in this new common level approach to all the other subjects at JCSA and because there is no distinction between HL and OL like there is now, they will believe they are able for the equivalent HL Leaving Cert subject and that is often not the case.
Boober Fraggle wrote: » I have no problem with 40% continuous assessment, I don't see it as the problem at all. External assessment would be necessary though. It's done in enough subjects as it is, and I'm sure subject teachers would be able to come up with a viable option for continuous assessment in their own subjects, that could be assessed externally, languages and practicals are easy to organise, surely projects (that aren't just done by the teacher) can be assessed along with the exam in July. I think we will be balloted again rather than a straight out strike action...
implausible wrote: » Of course I'm engaging with learning outcomes and assessment! Every subject has learning outcomes and assessment! I teach 1st, 2nd, 4rd, 5th and 6th year English, I am constantly marking copies, this is assessment! Should I stop in case I be accused of going against a union directive? Should I stop telling my class at the start what they will learn in case this is verboten? The teaching of English has not changed radically in first year, you still teach them how to write a report for example, except when the JCSA comes in, you'll have to explicitly match that up to a learning outcome in your planning. The major change will arrive when we have to gather up a collection of work and conduct an oral examination in second year. Teachers are using new books, not because of radically new content, but because it makes planning easier and eventually will make it easier to focus on oral language.
endakenny wrote: » The JCSA will still be a stepping stone; it'll have the Department's logo on the certificate and it will reduce stress by reducing the emphasis on terminal exams, meaning that the end-of-junior-cycle assessment will be more than just a rehearsal for the LC and will let students conserve their mental energy for the LC. It may have been argued in the past that the abolition of the Primary Cert would leave pupils unprepared for secondary education but that fear didn't materialise. The same logic applies to the transition from JCSA to LC.
endakenny wrote: » Surely, it would be explained that "Achieved" means 40 to 54%, the same as a D in the current grading system. Therefore, it would be known that students who only get the "Achieved" grade in a JCSA common level subject would be unsuitable for LC HL in that subject.
km79 wrote: » explained to who ? a 15 year old child ? try it some time see how reasonable some of them are. sure none of them ever think they know better than an adult who has seen and done it all before.
acequion wrote: » I have a major problem with assessing my own students,full stop! Firstly.I am their teacher,not their judge. Secondly,I don't see the logic in changing what's not broken for what has been proved to be broken in other countries.The neo liberals who run this country have already done enough damage with their "smash and grab" policies and now they basically want to shove in a cheaper but ill conceived alternative to the state exam, onto to a school system which has no structures set up for it.Talk about loading the donkey as another poster aptly described it! Thirdly,I am very worried about our working conditions and our ability to cope if this comes in,considering the demolition of our conditions to date.And the resulting consequences on our students,so go figure that one out! And lastly,as I've said numerous times,external assessment will only greatly increase the pressure on the teacher. Marking may be fine in some subjects where the answers are either correct or incorrect,but take English,where it is very subjective! No teacher should be forced to do that unless by choice and for payment,as in the current system. So,therefore keep the current system of 100% external,anonymous marking of anonymous,numbered exam candidates,for everybody's sake. Not only do you think this JCSA is inevitable,you appear to actively support it. Perhaps you might tell us why? By focusing on the JCSA curriculum, you are most certainly contravening a union directive. The current curriculum and its assessment does not include the term,"learning outcomes", a nothing buzz word dreamt up by the proponents of a narrow education philosophy which is "outcomes" or quite simply, results, obsessed. I also disagree with your earlier comment that the current system needs to change.Certain changes need to be made for sure, but changes and updated syllabus can be incorporated into the present system. I also teach English and you are quite wrong to assume that the majority of teachers have changed the course book.I know for a fact that all the schools in the large town where I teach have stuck with their old texts and have not changed their practice. You are not a teacher,Enda,so you basically don't know what you're talking about! You are constantly on these threads asking all sorts of questions,which many posters,myself included,have taken the trouble to answer in full. Your interest in all of this seems to be purely academic but it's my bread and butter as well as my profession and my career and I'm starting to find your constant interjections tiresome!
Inspector Coptoor wrote: » I think the unions have missed a beat here with them timing of the strike. I think a better idea would have been to call a half day strike from lunch time on We'd 10th Dec and join in the world after charges protest. I don't really give a $h1t€ about having th support of the public, they are largely a shower of race to the bottom, pay peanuts get monkeys, ill informed plebs, who firmly believe they know what a teacher's job entails simply by havung gone to school for 6 years. I don't think striking achieves Anything though. All that had to be done was return the continuous assessment project books to sender and refuse to monitor them. I won't go against the Union directive but once again, I'm left disappointed by Union leadership.
Jamfa wrote: » There are no project books as there is no continuous assessment. There are 2 school based assessments which require nothing to be sent to anyone outside the school. The Minister has offered some external monitoring but otherwise the results would be decided after moderation.
Inspector Coptoor wrote: » Ah yes, but in what subject(s)? We can't give in on this. This is the Rock the profession could perish on. Enough is enough, feck off with this bolloxology and go back to the drawing board Jan. Flush RQ's model firmly down the jacks
Jamfa wrote: » She's done that & gone with the NCCA model.
Teacher22 wrote: » I think the unions should have called for a stop to extra curricular immediately..all extra curricular. Then people will see what teachers do that they don't get paid for
rainbowtrout wrote: » Of course they will know it's between 40-54%. You try telling a student that has passed a common level exam that they are unsuitable for Higher Level.
Teacher22 wrote: » Why?
endakenny wrote: » When I was in first year, the results of our house exams at the end of first year were used to decide whether we did HL or OL in English, Irish and Maths. A similar arrangement with the JCSA could be used to decide whether students are suitable for HL or OL in LC History, Geography and in the science and business subjects.
