gaiscioch wrote: » Now that state certification is reinstated and that 60% of the JC will be externally assessed, I'm going to put my head above the parapet here and ask: what's so bad about 40% of the students' results being continuous assessment? Surely it would help teachers facing discipline issues in their classroom, while also assisting those weak kids who cannot take the burden of exam pressure? (yes, of course it is being done to save money but that doesn't necessarily mean it has no merit) Actually, as second years usually seem to be the bane of teachers in all schools, perhaps if we had some sort of link between 2nd and 3rd year results we might have a general improvement in behaviour in 2nd years also?
Pwpane wrote: » Well said. I figure that in the Celtic Tiger that unions just went out of fashion - 'sure we don't need them anymore, they're just cranks that are trying to bring down good employers.' Young people stopped joining unions and the gains made previously by unions more or less continued in place. There were some cracks, as with Irish Ferries, but the proverbial didn't hit the fan until the recession when employers were now free to do what they liked, up as far as the govt with it's FEMPI act. Unions are about members of the union acting collectively for their own good when one person on their own has no power. They're not all-powerful or all-good. But they're one hell of a lot better than facing the system on your own. When I joined the union in the eighties, everybody joined. And we achieved a hell of a lot. Young teachers and part-time teachers need to take on the system and do the same. Those that I've spoken to seem to feel paralysed. Some are still not in the union so are totally powerless. Some have joined but won't attend meetings so their voices are not heard and their abilities are not used. A few do attend and help but often they cannot speak openly as peer pressure is still negative. This means that the union is ineffective even their own schools - where it can do a lot. You need to do what we did and achieve what you want.
Jamfa wrote: » Yes
acequion wrote: » Are you a teacher?
Jamfa wrote: » That's all fine but who decides the curriculum in schools? From what you're saying you & other teachers have chosen to teach a curriculum which whether you like it or not doesn't exist anymore according to the DES. Has this happened before where teachers continue with a curriculum despite it being changed? Are some maths teachers in <MOD SNIP> still teaching the old Maths coyrse?
acequion wrote: » I really am beginning to wonder what language I've been posting in or perhaps what planet some posters are living on! :rolleyes: Are certain posters not aware that there has been widespread opposition to the JCSA,not least by the very unions we love to lambaste? Are certain posters not aware that the unions appealed to the DES to postpone the introduction of the JCSA to allow time to reach a more workable and mutually acceptable solution? Are certain posters not aware that the DES has persistently refused that reasonable request, despite the retiring of the architect of the JCSA? Are certain posters not aware that last May [or perhaps April?] the unions passed a vote of non compliance with the JCSA as a result of DES intransigence? And finally,are certain posters not aware that unions passed another recent vote to ratchet up the industrial action,again as a result of DES intransigence? Now,yes there are some grey areas in the above questions.Another poster has already posted the exact union directive,which technically does not ban members from teaching the new course. However,in the light of what I have just clarified above,how can anyone claim that there is a new course up and running when there patently is not? If we must split hairs on this, we are talking about first year English .Period. The actual practice of the JCSA doesn't really kick in until second year English.So it's not as though we are revolutionising the wheel by carrying on as before. There isn't really a first year English course,to speak of,it's mainly an introduction to what they will later study in depth.And some vitally important work on overall literacy. It is also not as if a particular group of teachers decided to get all bolshy. Even if I,personally,were not very opposed to the JCSA,you can't teach a new course without the proper infrastructure and proper training. The in services we were receiving were a joke,at best, and there is zero infrastructure or forward planning in place for the new course. So,like sensible people, the |English teachers in my school,and to my knowledge,around my town and county [source:branch meeting] decided to continue as normal,while awaiting a solution. In my opinion,any teacher,who despite all that,is actually following this new course either out of fear of breach of contract,or total disregard for majority concerns,should hang his/her head in shame. While HR concerned teachers working conditions for the foreseeable future,this concerns the future of Irish education,the education of our children and grandchildren. It has enormous consequences for our society and goes much further than the kids sitting junior English in 2017.
implausible wrote: » The Dept has instructed teachers to teach it; the unions have not told teachers not to teach it. Our conditions of service oblige us to carry out the instructions of the Minister for Education.
Jamfa wrote: » I wonder is there any precedence for a group of teachers not teaching the new curriculum and following one that doesn't exist anymore. Something needs to be sorted out soon because there won't be a Junior Cert English exam in 2017 for your students to sit.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » Not really my point. Im not talking about the past. Im talking about the future. The ASTI was against all of those proposals. All. The CEC told members to reject HR. Only about 10% of CEC are under 30. What did the members do-accept it! Many young teachers voted for HR to get CID and to avoid a strike. You cant say they all voted against as I know that many did. They told me. So the future is all we have. Trust me if one more young teacher turned up at a branch meeting you would have change. I appreciate people have mortgages and kids-but its like an operation you must have. Keep putting it off and off and it will get you in the end.Im tired of excuses-get off your backsides and take over the union.
acequion wrote: » That is not correct either. I really want to make it clear to everybody reading this that the idea of the JCSA being "in" is a perception,not a reality on the ground. Yes,the DES will say it's in,but nothing is in unless it's fully implemented.
The new specification for Junior Cycle English will be implemented in all schools from September 2014. The specification is available at www.juniorcycle.ie.
4. Not to engage in any aspect of school-based assessment for the purpose of the Junior Cycle Student Award (JCSA).
Caiseoipe19 wrote: » The revised payscale for new entrants and abolition of allowances were brought in for future entrants to the profession. So how could they have stood up for themselves at meetings before they were even qualified? The people worst affected at present are those that qualified in 2012, 2013 and 2014, non of whom could have been members of the ASTI at the time of the cuts. Yes, they should attend meetings after qualifying in order to fight for the cuts to be reversed, but the ASTI shouldn't have accepted them in the first place. They have every right to feel aggrieved.
acequion wrote: » That is not correct either. I really want to make it clear to everybody reading this that the idea of the JCSA being "in" is a perception,not a reality on the ground. Yes,the DES will say it's in,but nothing is in unless it's fully implemented. To repeat what I said earlier. I teach in a large school in a large town. Not one English teacher in this town is recognising or implementing the JCSA in first year English. In my school, all English teachers agreed at the end of last year after the first ballot to continue as normal with the old book and that is exactly what we are doing.If some English teachers around the country have thrown in the towel or decided to start implementing the new course despite the concerns and opposition of the majority,then that is very regrettable. But as far as we are concerned the JCSA has not started and that is why we have voted to take strike action. I would urge my collegues in science to put up one hell of a fight.
killbillvol2 wrote: » Well I reported a particularly vivid example of sweeping generalisation/general BS in the last few hours. I could probably report every post by the same poster but what's the point?
Armelodie wrote: » It's ok speaking for others but until folk start reporting the nature of the trolling then as I said it'll get kicked right back to the mods in a DRP case. We can't go on 'feelings'.
implausible wrote: » Which is what happened with English - wait until it starts and then kick up a fuss.
km79 wrote: » the asti released a statement end of sept saying that any union member who completed this survey was in breach of non compliamce directive ABSOLUTELY DAFT luckily I had already completed it
rainbowtrout wrote: » Well I feel there is no other option other than to reply to this on thread so other teachers who post on the forum can see it.
rainbowtrout wrote: » Mods may feel that the trolling is low level, but clearly the teachers on the forum who post here regularly do not.
rainbowtrout wrote: » The charter is fed by the opinion of the posters on the forum, the majority of whom are teachers, and it is a forum for teaching (and lecturing). I can't speak for everyone who posts on here, but in my personal opinion I don't think the bans or infractions go far enough, particularly when there are persistent offenders. Maybe the current charter is not fit for purpose and needs to be updated with input from teachers - a bit like the Junior Cert really.
rainbowtrout wrote: » I would imagine that many posters do not report posts because they see mods posting in the same threads and assume the mods will take action. Two mods have posted in this thread in the last 24 hours so I assume have read the posts.
rainbowtrout wrote: » It is in the charter that posters are not to make sweeping generalisations, yet they are made wholesale on this forum by non teachers on a regular basis, and again in my opinion should not be tolerated.
rainbowtrout wrote: » This specific thread is here to discuss strike action and has veered somewhat off topic on to JCSA assessment but seeing as strike action is because of JCSA assessment they are related. Strike action has been mandated by teachers. The unions represent those teachers including the posters here. We are employees discussing our working conditions and what the ramifications are of the impending strike action and JSCA assessment. So it's a bit hard to take when posters come onto the thread and constantly make generalisations about what they saw when they were students. We are discussing our working conditions, and their contribution should have no bearing on that.
rainbowtrout wrote: » If the nurses or the guards were on strike I wouldn't head over to the health sciences forum or the garda recruitment forum and tell them that the changes proposed to their working conditions were fine because I was once in hospital or got my passport form signed in the local station.
rainbowtrout wrote: » As for responding to 'non-teacher' posts. Well we are basically vilified by much of the public and the amount of teacher bashing that goes on in the media is unbelievable. Teachers have few outlets to represent their point of view, and challenging non-teachers online is often the only way. Only yesterday the journal posted their article about our impending strike on Facebook accompanied by the comment 'Christmas shopping has just got busier for two days.' the implication being that we will all be off shopping on the 2nd instead of picketing. Of course many of the comments in response were of the 'there'll be traffic jams all the way to Newry with all the teachers in them' Should we have to tolerate similar in his forum? Personal Issues and The Ladies Lounge have zero tolerance style charters, why can't we?
Inspector Coptoor wrote: » I'm all for having astronomy in the new syllabus but not at the expense of human biology, the one part of science most kids are actually interested in
km79 wrote: » no they can't. I emailled them on it and they were crystal clear. No comoliance with any aspect of it. so basically ignore the appalling new syllabus until it comes in!
rainbowtrout wrote: » Now that is daft. How can you register your dissatisfaction with the proposals if you can't tell them you are dissatisfied? Because there are two separate battles going on. Changes to syllabus and changes to assessment. Don't have a major problem with changes to a syllabus if it's done properly. I do have major problems with proposed changes to assessment. Surely ASTI can see that the main bugbear is the proposal that we assess the coursework and not the actual concept of coursework?
Inspector Coptoor wrote: » I found the survey and slated the proposed new syllabus and I'll be bringing it up at the next dept meeting in school
rainbowtrout wrote: » There is an option for teachers to give feedback through an online survey on the draft syllabus. I made sure they got my (horrified and angry) feedback at the decimation of the science course. I hope other science teachers do similar.
implausible wrote: » Rainbowtrout's concerns about the Science syllabus are the type of thing that should be addressed now, before implementation and maybe industrial action will yield adjustments.
Armelodie wrote: » As per usual procedure.. Do not respond to this warning.
acequion wrote: » As with the HR capitulation,the real obstacle is not the union,nor the DES. It's teachers like you who just roll over and give in to each new demand. I'm sorry if you don't like my saying as much,but unfortunately,it's true.
