Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is the leaving cert the best way to determine if a student is right for college?

1235»

Comments

  • #122
    DuchessduJour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 233 ✭✭DuchessduJour


    Tarzana2 wrote: »
    Well, I personally think it gives *some* as outlined in this post:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93250713&postcount=83

    Just my own 2c, others will undoubtedly disagree.

    One thing though, I think people are very quick to put down people's excellent LC results, like it couldn't POSSIBLY be because they are very clever and have an aptitude for many subjects, OBVIOUSLY they learned everything off by rote. It's a bit sneery.

    People tend to do this with degree results too I've found. I graduated on Friday with a First, and within minutes of having the degree in my hand a few of my friends' parents had commented that they thought I'd find it difficult to have a career because I obviously didn't have a very balanced life and must have poor social skills from being 'shut off in the library for four years,' which wasn't the case at all. I worked pretty hard alright, but I had the most fantastic time at university! I studied abroad, volunteered as a tutor and peer mentor, took part in many student societies, organised several events, debated, learned to swim and was the managing editor of an academic journal in my final year, as well as dealing with a lengthy commute and working part time as various points. It never fails to amaze me that people make ridiculous assumptions based on someone's grades or academic achievements. In what world is doing well in school or college indicative of a dull mind!? Of course there are some people whose results don't accurately reflect their capabilities, but that would be true of any system.

    Sorry for the rant, it's a bit of a bugbear of mine :p

    I'd largely agree that the Leaving Cert does teach some important life skills, time management and dedication being fairly obvious ones. I also think that a relatively broad base of knowledge is an advantage of the system. Fair enough, sometimes students have to make subject choices that may limit their options in the future, but this isn't an argument against compulsory subjects such as English and Maths, as they're both valuable and potentially open doors as far as third level choices are concerned.


  • #123
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Magnate wrote: »
    If they're not able to memorise 20 quotes they wouldn't have a hope with some of the other subjects. The little that you need to learn off for english is easily within everyones grasp. If english was their best subject then that would imply they have a great knowledge of their texts, and so would be able to make suitable reference to their texts without quotations and still get an A. You're presented a very unlikely hypothetical situation.



    I know, I did say that.






    I agreed, several times? I even said you could get get an A in orals by rote learning, not just a pass.

    It seems like you're arguing for the sake of it :p.

    I agree that a lot of the leaving cert is rote learning but a good understanding is required additionally, in many subjects. It's not fair to say it's just one or the other.


    I'm not making an unrealistic hypothetical situation. I could read since before my first birthday and I never went below an A in my creative writing (except once because "I don't want anyone getting an A in case you don't work") and was always considered gifted in English. My memory is hopeless though and I really struggled learning of so many quotes. It wasn't even twenty, it's far more. You have to learn quotes for every situation as you don't know what question is coming up. Then you've to learn off entire poems too. The only thing hypothetical was the grades.

    It's possible with the new system too, it's all we had to go on because not even the teachers understood how the new system worked.


  • #124
    smileyj1987
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,325 ✭✭✭smileyj1987


    Do what I did go to college at 27 when you have a clear idea of what you want to do with your life .


  • #125
    Magnate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 877 ✭✭✭Magnate


    sup_dude wrote: »
    I'm not making an unrealistic hypothetical situation. I could read since before my first birthday and I never went below an A in my creative writing (except once because "I don't want anyone getting an A in case you don't work") and was always considered gifted in English. My memory is hopeless though and I really struggled learning of so many quotes. It wasn't even twenty, it's far more. You have to learn quotes for every situation as you don't know what question is coming up. Then you've to learn off entire poems too.

    It's possible with the new system too, it's all we had to go on because not even the teachers understood how the new system worked.

    Okay realistically, 15 quotes from the single text, 3 strategically chosen ones from each of the comparative texts and a good few for poetry I'll admit, but you could skip the studied poetry question and still get 550/600. So with just 24 quotes you can get 92%. Now lets say you don't include any quotes in your poetry and scrape 70% in that section, you can still get nearly 98%. There's a lot more to leaving cert english than just creative writing. It's a lot more about understanding, formulating your own opinions and articulating them coherently and I suspect this is why you didn't get an A1.

    Anyway let's just agree that it's a mixture of understanding and rote learning. As for maths, there's still absolutely no way you can get an A1 without applying your knowledge. A lesser grade - sure.


  • #126
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Magnate wrote: »
    Okay realistically, 15 quotes from the single text, 3 strategically chosen ones from each of the comparative texts and a good few for poetry I'll admit, but you could skip the studied poetry question and still get 550/600. So with just 24 quotes you can get 92%. Now lets say you don't include any quotes in your poetry and scrape 70% in that section, you can still get nearly 98%. There's a lot more to leaving cert english than just creative writing. It's a lot more about understanding, formulating your own opinions and articulating them coherently and I suspect this is why you didn't get an A1.

    Anyway let's just agree that it's a mixture of understanding and rote learning. As for maths, there's still absolutely no way you can get an A1 without applying your knowledge. A lesser grade - sure.


    Can I just remind you that I did state that the only hypothetical part was the grades? And therefore I did not indicate what grade I got. I was merely stating that learning off that many quotes was a huge challenge for me. I am also more than aware there is more to it than creative writing, having sat it.

    Really? Because there were more than one A1 in our year and that was with nobody having any idea what was going on.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Magnate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 877 ✭✭✭Magnate


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Can I just remind you that I did state that the only hypothetical part was the grades? And therefore I did not indicate what grade I got. I was merely stating that learning off that many quotes was a huge challenge for me. I am also more than aware there is more to it than creative writing, having sat it.

    Fair enough, but when you go from saying:
    sup_dude wrote: »
    Take someone who's gifted at writing but not at memorising. English could be their best subject and they could write great essays but because they couldn't learn off 20 or so quotes, they only got a B, which isn't exactly fair.

    To saying:
    sup_dude wrote: »
    I'm not making an unrealistic hypothetical situation. I could read since before my first birthday and I never went below an A in my creative writing (except once because "I don't want anyone getting an A in case you don't work") and was always considered gifted in English.

    It does imply that you were talking about yourself in the first instance, suggesting you didn't get the grade you deserved.
    sup_dude wrote: »
    Really? Because there were more than one A1 in our year and that was with nobody having any idea what was going on.

    If you were in a pilot school for project maths and many got the A1 it serves as a testament to the fact that an ability to understand and manipulate information is required. You would have had a lack of past resources to "rote learn" in the first place, and teachers would have had to focus on the more on the actual concepts as opposed to just going through the motions. The whole purpose of the project maths syllabus is the reduce the reliance on rote learned material and require the practical application of skills. That's widely accepted.

    I was in one of the pilot schools for junior cert project maths and the people who do well are the ones able to understand what they're doing not just rote learn. I remember one year we got the wrong mock paper and everyone did on average 20% better than they did on the subsequent project maths paper.

    Perhaps the people with "no idea what was going on" and still got A1's knew a little more than they let on. Don't forget that the earlier project maths papers had a very forgiving marking scheme - you could get attempt marks by simply writing down the required formula.


  • #128
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,169 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    sup_dude wrote: »
    But learn exact quotes? If you were able to say the gist of something, that should be enough rather than losing marks because you didn't say the quote word for word

    On the contrary - especially in literature, but also in other situations (like taking a medical history) the exact words used can be very important. Even in "ordinary" situations, the use or misuse of a quote can cause amusement, ridicule, insult or abuse.


  • #129
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    looking_around wrote: »
    English should be 2 subjects.

    The poetry/ literature subject and a more practical day to day subject. (CV's/Letters, basic understanding of what you read, perhaps learning how to research and write college style essays.

    There's no reason to have these together, wrapped up in the one subject.

    IME of English, it was too much on the literature and "creative" writing, and lacking in actual practical uses.

    I would agree with this and have said it myself before.

    People seem to think that English is somehow the exception to the rule for just learning stuff off. I did exactly that and while I didnt get an A I did well enough to get into college. I didnt have to analyse anything, our teacher went through the poem etc and told us what it meant. I just learnt what the quotes mean and write that down. I couldnt have cared less what the writer or poet was thinking but learnt it off so I could make some crap up.


  • #130
    whateverusay
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27 ✭whateverusay


    As a former "participant" of the Leaving Cert myself, I believe that it is actually a very fair system of examination. Yes, there may be a lot to learn, but there are so many subjects out there that you are bound to find 3 or 4 that interest you to put along with english, maths, irish to gain entry to college.It is anonymous, which is a lot fairer than interviews or the alike where you may be favoured because you know the examiner or have some link with them. Personally, I think the leaving cert point requirements are generally indicative of the "level" of difficulty associated with that particular course, i.e. medicine and veterinary among the top, and i wont list the bottom courses incase i offend anyone, but lets just say the more 'general courses at the bottom that are a stepping stone to something else'....Being in veterinary myself, it is clear that I probably wouldn't have been able to get through it if i got anything less than top marks in the leaving cert, even in this highly specialised, intensive course which requires so much understanding and learning, there are elements that you have to 'learn off', but with repetition of use, even if you don't have photographic memory, you will eventually learn a satisfactory amount required. So on a lot more basic level, such as the leaving cert, I don't see why with repetition, those who struggle to memorise, people can't learn off a small amount of material they may need to learn off for english etc or a small area they cant grasp in a language or maths.Saying that, the highest grades most of the time, wont be achieved without proper understanding of their subjects, but most people's mistakes are choosing the wrong subjects. In relation to english, I did bare minimum and only spent one day studying for it because I dont like the fact that it is subjective to examiners personal preference of style, and knew i would never count it in my top 6.. even at that I got a low B in honours.......


  • #131
    conorhal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,059 ✭✭✭conorhal


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I don't think it is. Lets illustrate the current situation. Right now entry into science in UCD is around 500 points. So basically you want to be able to do well in each subject to to get the required points. So lets say you get an A plus in chemistry, physics and maths but get a c or D in Geography or French you might miss out on science. Therefore according to our college entry testing system you wouldn't make a good scientist. F%$ off.

    You might think if it aint broke then why fix it? Well I think it is broke. The proof in the pudding is performance. As the points for science has risen we should expect to see an increase in test scores in science? We don't in fact what we get is students who are good at learning facts. The real evidence is in the science 4th year project. You basically have to find something out. E.G some students might have to determine the serotonin levels in certain cells for example. This project involves creativity, thinking outside the box and the application of facts. This is were many brilliant leaving cert students fail the module.

    The leaving cert doesn't correctly match a student's talents to the correct course IMHO. This isn't just the case for science IMHO. It applies to all disciplines.

    The leaving cert puts too much pressure on students to learn irrelevant facts and develop irrelevant skills IMHO.

    1) there are no irrelevant facts.

    and

    2) what you describe is a failure of people filling out their CAO forms in matching their skills to their further education rather then a failure of the Leaving Cert.
    More effective guidence counselling, problem mostly solved.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    The_Captain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭The_Captain


    conorhal wrote: »
    1) there are no irrelevant facts.

    and

    2) what you describe is a failure of people filling out their CAO forms in matching their skills to their further education rather then a failure of the Leaving Cert.
    More effective guidence counselling, problem mostly solved.

    How is that in any way a failure of people filling in their CAO forms? He's talking about people who could be incredibly talented at science being denied a place in a science course because of a weakness in languages.

    You used to hear reports that people in charge of Medicine courses were unhappy that the classes would be filled with autistic study freaks with no interest/aptitude for medicine to the point where they actually had to change it to make social skills part of the entry requirement.


  • #133
    elefant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭elefant


    The_Captain wrote: »
    How is that in any way a failure of people filling in their CAO forms? He's talking about people who could be incredibly talented at science being denied a place in a science course because of a weakness in languages.

    You used to hear reports that people in charge of Medicine courses were unhappy that the classes would be filled with autistic study freaks with no interest/aptitude for medicine to the point where they actually had to change it to make social skills part of the entry requirement.

    :o


  • #134
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Apologies guys. I haven't forgotten this thread I've just been very busy. I will respond to the points made later today.


  • #135
    07cohare
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1 ✭07cohare


    The_Captain wrote: »
    How is that in any way a failure of people filling in their CAO forms? He's talking about people who could be incredibly talented at science being denied a place in a science course because of a weakness in languages.

    You used to hear reports that people in charge of Medicine courses were unhappy that the classes would be filled with autistic study freaks with no interest/aptitude for medicine to the point where they actually had to change it to make social skills part of the entry requirement.

    Equally, if you're not a study freak then good luck getting through Medicine exams. I'd happily admit that I spent 99% of my sixth year in the study hall, and now in Veterinary Medicine, I need to be spending twice the amount of time that I spent two years ago studying in the library because the academics are that hard. However, because I'm mad into the textbooks and seriously borderline autistic, does this mean I'm not socially able and passionate about the practical element of my course?


  • #136
    The_Captain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭The_Captain


    07cohare wrote: »
    Equally, if you're not a study freak then good luck getting through Medicine exams. I'd happily admit that I spent 99% of my sixth year in the study hall, and now in Veterinary Medicine, I need to be spending twice the amount of time that I spent two years ago studying in the library because the academics are that hard. However, because I'm mad into the textbooks and seriously borderline autistic, does this mean I'm not socially able and passionate about the practical element of my course?


    No, not at all. You can be studious, intelligent and passionate, get 600 points and go on to be an incredible doctor.

    However, you could have no interest in medicine, no empathy or people skills and put down Medicine in TCD as your number one choice on the CAO form because it's the "best" course in the country, then go on to be a terrible doctor

    Clearly it was a big enough problem to require changing the entry requirements to medicine courses to bring in students with less than 590/600 points.


Advertisement