implausible wrote: » Don't get so personal. You know nothing about any other element of my life, so don't generalise that my desire to get on with a new course is some kind of a character flaw. If the only reason I was introducing new elements in to my teaching was out of fear, then I would perhaps deserve emotive descriptions such as "narrow-minded obedience" and "doggedly obeying orders." You seem to have missed the point that I argued my point and made my views known, but the course is now in, my concerns seem to have been addressed by the new proposals, and I can see the merits in the new course. I am enjoying teaching my students and I can see how it will benefit them. But I suppose this is pure selfishness and "total disregard for majority concerns.":rolleyes:
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?
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.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » Might I suggest you pen a letter to Irish indo or times? I have published quite a few. You might even guess who I am . We need a bigger audience. Will you consider it? I have contact details for Education editors both. Its time consuming. I have had about ten published plus three articles. I need backup.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » I thought somebody might pick up on my line "You might guess who I am". You know my name say my name its Mr xxxxx xxxxx. Im mr White pseudonym (breaking Bad) Come on people its a clear reference!!
endakenny wrote: » The parents' representatives on the board of management won't be able to bring about the sacking of the principal just because the principal is being professional. Teachers are already subject to pressure from parents with regard to the disciplining of pupils. The principal and deputy principal of my alma mater said that disrespect towards teachers would not be tolerated. My alma mater is a voluntary secondary school (VSS). VSSs are under patronage of either the Catholic or Anglican church and the work ethic that priests, monks and nuns instilled when they ran these schools means that their discipline is quite good. It is possible that the State-run schools' discipline is not as good, as the following case shows.http://www.independent.ie/life/family/learning/union-dumps-teachers-after-row-over-press-release-claims-25889959.html
Corkgirl18 wrote: » Just wondering what student teachers are supposed to do in this strike action? We aren't in any unions obviously. I'm currently doing the PDE. My principal is out with the last few weeks and the other teachers in the school are being fairly vague about whether we come in to school or not. . My tutors don't really have a clue either. I just want to do the right thing. Any idea what that is?
Xcellor wrote: » I don't understand this dispute. Make the examination papers anonymous so that the teacher doesn't know who they are marking. And.. Get teachers to mark other students that they don't teach. Striking seems a bit over the top imo.
mirrorwall14 wrote: » Its far more than just the 40%. You are oversimplifying
Xcellor wrote: » Oversimplifying probably but striking is over-exaggerating.It doesn't appear at least to the lay person that enough dialog has occurred. If teachers wanted to bring parents with them and the wider public, striking is not the solution.
Pwpane wrote: » It doesn't seem as if you know anything about it. Why do you think striking is over the top? What else would you suggest that hasn't already occurred?
trebormurf wrote: » That works both ways buddy, ask 10 people do they understand the new proposals for the JCSA & the number who understand would be low.And when do the public support teachers anyway, strike or no strike?!
Xcellor wrote: » Ask 10 people on the street whether they support teachers striking. I'd expect the amount of support to be rather low. Ask another 10 people after you strike. I'd expect the amount to be even lower.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Very rare you'll find me on the side of the teachers but even aside from the extra workload the inevitable increase in CA is just inviting more stress on teachers. I know the vast majority won't play favorites (+/- a few percent, it's impossible to be completely impartial with people you see most days) but the hassle from parents and interference from outside that will be encouraged would be what I'd be worried about.
killbillvol2 wrote: » This sums it up. There's no point in pandering to public opinion.
mirrorwall14 wrote: » The other thing that you won't find the education department acknowledging if that continuous assessment can actually really stress students out. At the moment ask any JC or LC student how they are coming up to practicals/orals/portfolio time and they will tell you they are stressed to the 9's. While it's nice to spread the grade, for some students it is a nightmare scenario.
[Deleted User] wrote: » This is something I have to admit I didn't see teachers acknowledge when I was in school til about 7 years ago. The "teacher-line" seemed to be that CA was more fair rather than one big exam. My experience was that the people who panicked about the exams panicked about every little bit of CA. Telling a kid that 1st or 2nd year that they could lose any chance of an A because of one little project doesn't seem great to me.