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

Strike On ! Proposed New Junior Cert See Mod Warning Post #1

Highjacking OP's post for ....

Mod Gentle Warning

OK folks, It looks like this is going to be 'The strike-thread', so for the proposes of civility I'd ask that we just try to keep the title in mind to focus the debate as a lot of 'kitchen sinks' are going to get thrown around.

We've done the circular blame game of young vs' old teachers to death on here so I think the time is appropriate to move on.

Also the circular argument of ASTI vs TUI/INTO.

Also management vs' teachers.

These can muddy the waters of the substantive issue of the proposed JCSA and the strike action.

As usual...

Read charter (there will be a test for the boldies).
Report stuff ... or use the ignore function for people who annoy you.
It's an open forum so think of it as an oppertunity to challenge and change some peoples' views.

MOD

Are most voting? What way? No real talks have occurred with Minister because of ballot. JMB has suggested we go back to 2011 NCCA proposals-though their timing for this suggestion (during a ballot) is seen as poor.
Bottom line folks unless you are prepared to go out for a few strike days-you're screwed. That's my view-all that's being suggested so far is a few Temporary A posts to help bring it in. Jan also says "Its not about money"

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

If we use the summer exam in 2nd year and the midterm/xmas exam in 3rd year, and they were the corrections that made up 40% of the state exam, would people be happy with that??

It doesnt include any extra work as we already set, correct and send home these results.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

If we use the summer exam in 2nd year and the midterm/xmas exam in 3rd year, and they were the corrections that made up 40% of the state exam, would people be happy with that??

It doesnt include any extra work as we already set, correct and send home these results.

Absolutely not. It would be an extremely slippery slope! Anyway, the correcting and reporting would then turn into huge hassle with multiple meetings to ensure we were all doing things exactly the same. Cue huge pressure about what is at the moment a routine part of the job.Anyway,they don't want that. They want all these portfolios and orals to make up the 40% with us marking them.

There is only one thing to do here and that's dig our heels in and fight it out.We've given enough and enough really is enough. As has already been pointed out,this Govt are nearing the end of their term and Pat King is retiring.

It doesn't have to be orals or portfolios, it can be written work I.e written exams.

And yes, we will have meetings about how to correct them, at least well be doing something properly with our 33 croke park hours

Chancer3001 wrote: »

It doesn't have to be orals or portfolios, it can be written work I.e written exams

The whole point of the proposed teacher assessment is that it is not a written exam. A different form of assessment. How are you not getting that?

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The whole point of the proposed teacher assessment is that it is not a written exam. A different form of assessment. How are you not getting that?

I really despair at times. This is why it's so important that leadership hold strong and not allow a ballot. People will vote and not realise what they are actually voting for.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

It doesn't have to be orals or portfolios, it can be written work I.e written exams.

And yes, we will have meetings about how to correct them, at least well be doing something properly with our 33 croke park hours

And I despair when I see posts like this!!

acequion wrote: »

And I despair when I see posts like this!!

Why??

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The whole point of the proposed teacher assessment is that it is not a written exam. A different form of assessment. How are you not getting that?

Did you read the draft??

Go to section 2.2
If somebody could copy and paste that would be great.

A SHORT WRITTEN EXAM will suffice. Which is exactly what we do at the moment.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Did you read the draft??

Go to section 2.2
If somebody could copy and paste that would be great.

A SHORT WRITTEN EXAM will suffice. Which is exactly what we do at the moment.

I'd be worried about your lack of copy and paste skills and also selective quoting

These arrangements will be adjusted as follows for the suite of technology subjects and Art
where practical and performance components currently represent the major part (more
than 50%) of assessment for the subject:
 One or two school-based assessments completed in second-year and reported upon to
students and parents by schools
 A short written or practical examination and/or the submission of an artefact or
project leading to State certification

OK, so let me run through a list of subjects for JC off the top of my head and see where we would 'get away' with just a written exam

Irish
English
Maths
History
Geography
Foreign Languages
Science
Woodwork
Tech Graph
Metalwork
Art
Music
Home Economics
Business Studies
CSPE

I'm sure there are a few more but that's basically what's on offer in my school

Current project components in those subjects:

Irish - JC Oral
Science - 35% coursework
CSPE - 40% action project
Music - Practical (don't know the %)
Art - Portfolio/ Practical exam - no written paper
Woodwork/Metalwork - project/practical examination
Home Ec - Practical cookery exam and project (crafts, needlework etc)

I would predict that it would be expected that foreign language teachers would conduct an oral, and would also expect that history and geography teachers would do a research project as a precursor to the set up in those subjects for Leaving Cert. My school does the JC Irish oral, again like foreign languages I would think it would be expected that this would become part of teacher assessment component.

That leaves English, Maths and Business. the notion of oral presentations etc have already been mooted for the new English course.

Do you honestly think that the DES are going to just say 'sure, just do a written exam in second year like you do at Christmas and that will be grand'. Are they fcuk going to say that.

None of the practical components above are going to be dropped, only added to I reckon. And once they have this assessment in, then it's only a matter of time before the amount we assess increases and the amount the DES account for decreases.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Did you read the draft??

Go to section 2.2
If somebody could copy and paste that would be great.

A SHORT WRITTEN EXAM will suffice. Which is exactly what we do at the moment.

That's not what 2.2 says at all? It says that there will be 2 school based assessments in 2nd and 3rd year and that a variety of assessment methods will be used in each subject. The short written exam you are talking about is a State Certified written exam specifically for the practical subjects who already do a practical exam worth more than 50%.

Essentially it means that Art for example will continue to have both a written/practical element assessed by the SEC, AS WELL AS the two school based assessments which will Not be written exams, see 3.3 for what the school based assessments will be. That line is simply allowing for subjects who may not necessarily have a written paper under the current system

You are misreading it.

2.2 states that all subjects (both technical and non technical) will have two school based assessments-the first sentence in each of them-which will be given School certification. The second point in each is referring to the State certification.

We'd get away with a short written exam in all subjects.

Any of the projects or course work or orals can be for the 60% and examined by the state.

There are two 2.2s

The first is for all subjects.

It says 2 school based assessments (Xmas and midterm for example) and one state exam.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

We'd get away with a short written exam in all subjects.

Any of the projects or course work or orals can be for the 60% and examined by the state.

Seriously, have you read the document??

The document states that the SEC will provide a 1.5 hour exam for their component

Examinations
4.1 Externally set and marked examinations, normally of one-and-a-half hours duration, will
complement school-based assessment of students’ achievements in a maximum of 10
subjects. Typically, the examination will represent a notional 60% of the documented
learning for the subject. This will vary for the suite of technology subjects and other
subjects where practical and performance components represent the major part of
assessment.
4.2 The examinations will be set, held and marked by the State Examinations Commission.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Seriously, have you read the document??

The document states that the SEC will provide a 1.5 hour exam for their component

And?

Chancer3001 wrote: »

We'd get away with a short written exam in all subjects.

Any of the projects or course work or orals can be for the 60% and examined by the state.

But that's not what the document says??! It specifically says that only the technical subjects and Art may continue to have SEC assessed and certified practical elements. All other subjects will be written exams for the state certification. The 40% school certification will include (as per 3.3) oral performances, presentations, written work of different types, the making of artefacts, artistic performances, scientific experiments, projects or other suitable tasks.

3.4 also states that these will be defined by the NCCA and run on a national timetable. There is no way that the school based assessments will be allowed to be written tests as the whole new JC is supposed to about moving away from that

Chancer3001 wrote: »

And?

And you don't understand the meaning of that statement?

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And you don't understand the meaning of that statement?

I understand it perfectly.

I fail to see you making any point.

So 3.3 says the exams can include written work OR other stuff.

3.4 says these will happen during class contact time, so they won't be in your free time.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

I understand it perfectly.

I fail to see you making any point.

Any response to mine? There is nothing in the document suggesting in any way that we would be allowed to have a short written exam for the 40%. Apart from anything else there would have to be at least two short written exams

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Any response to mine? There is nothing in the document suggesting in any way that we would be allowed to have a short written exam for the 40%. Apart from anything else there would have to be at least two short written exams

Yeah it would be two exams, I've said a few times, Xmas and midterm for example.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Yeah it would be two exams, I've said a few times, Xmas and midterm for example.

Ok I'm done. There is no way that document suggests that in any way. The department want continuous assessment in a variety of forms as indicated in the document (not more written tests), there is absolutely no way that we will be allowed to use exams to do this as has been pointed out. The NCCA are setting the tasks (3.4), they would never choose a task to be an in house test

You started out by completely misreading 2.2 and even when it was pointed out you are doggedly determined to suggest that house exams could be the 40%.

Edit: for clarity

If these tests came in, they would replace house exams. And therefore, become the same thing.

The document mentions avoiding over assessment.

Continuous assessment is exactly what using house exams as well as the end state exam would entail....

Chancer3001 wrote: »

So 3.3 says the exams can include written work OR other stuff.

3.4 says these will happen during class contact time, so they won't be in your free time.

Completing the assessment will be done in class time, when do you think you will sit down to correct it? I suspect that will very much be in your free time....

If the NCCA are deciding the timetable for these activities and tasks you can be damn sure that you won't 'get away' with a written exam. You will more than likely be given a list of tasks to choose from and you will have to choose multiple items to bring it to 40%.

You are incredibly naive if you think you will 'get away' with another written exam, when the central drive of the JCSA was to get away from written examinations as the main form of assessment.

I don't have a problem with students being assessed in a variety of ways other than the written exam. It's a way of examining different skills, particularly in practical subjects, but does lend itself to most subjects in one way or another. However, I, like most teachers, do have a problem with being tasked with assessing and providing the final grade for those tasks.

You don't seem to have a problem with that, but I would question your dedication to assessing students in this method when you describe your interpretation of the new form of assessment as what you can 'get away' with. Particularly when your interpretation of the document is to give yet another written exam. Sounds like the lazy way out to be honest.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Completing the assessment will be done in class time, when do you think you will sit down to correct it? I suspect that will very much be in your free time....

If the NCCA are deciding the timetable for these activities and tasks you can be damn sure that you won't 'get away' with a written exam. You will more than likely be given a list of tasks to choose from and you will have to choose multiple items to bring it to 40%.

You are incredibly naive if you think you will 'get away' with another written exam, when the central drive of the JCSA was to get away from written examinations as the main form of assessment.

I don't have a problem with students being assessed in a variety of ways other than the written exam. It's a way of examining different skills, particularly in practical subjects, but does lend itself to most subjects in one way or another. However, I, like most teachers, do have a problem with being tasked with assessing and providing the final grade for those tasks.

You don't seem to have a problem with that, but I would question your dedication to assessing students in this method when you describe your interpretation of the new form of assessment as what you can 'get away' with. Particularly when your interpretation of the document is to give yet another written exam. Sounds like the lazy way out to be honest.

I think they'd be quite happy to have brought in continuous assessment. Which is what they'd get, with at least 3 different exams being brought in.

Also, the time to correct it, it would be the time I currently use to correct the Xmas and midterm exams....so no change there.

Also, you're purely guessing about how this 40% will be made up. It doesn't say you will have to do more than one type of assessment. Just that different types can be used. It's and / OR . So if my school chooses written, then we can stick to the way the school is run at the moment.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

I think they'd be quite happy to have brought in continuous assessment. Which is what they'd get, with at least 3 different exams being brought in.

Also, the time to correct it, it would be the time I currently use to correct the Xmas and midterm exams....so no change there.

Also, you're purely guessing about how this 40% will be made up. It doesn't say you will have to do more than one type of assessment. Just that different types can be used. It's and / OR . So if my school chooses written, then we can stick to the way the school is run at the moment.

I don't have to guess. The vast majority of subjects, as I've already pointed out, have some form or practical component as it is. The SEC/DES are not going to get rid of the practical components in these subjects. As they are going to provide the written exam in June of third year, as per the draft document, that means the practical component will end up forming part or all of the school assessment.

The alternative to that is to remove the practical component completely and that's not going to happen, as it's not in the spirit of the subjects or in the spirit of the new JCSA.

But they'll have to modify the projects etc for this to work.

Remember the exams are to be done during class time.

Obviously you can't examine a 25 page CSPE exam during class time. It would take 4 months with just one class a week!!

Nor can you achieve substantial projects during class contact exams.

Take woodwork for example, the lads spent a few months making a chair / clock, whatever in class.

Usuallye it would be stored up until an examiner drives around and gives it a score.

In the new draft, the woodwork teacher would give the kid a score.

Ideally you'd have an external examiner, but the teacher knows what grade it deserves anyways. So it saves time and money.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

But they'll have to modify the projects etc for this to work.

Remember the exams are to be done during class time.

Obviously you can't examine a 25 page CSPE exam during class time. It would take 4 months with just one class a week!!

Nor can you achieve substantial projects during class contact exams.

Yes, but corrections will be done in your own time. How are CSPE projects currently carried out????

Currently the 35% going for Science coursework is done in class time. Only teachers would now have to correct it in their free time.

Currently CSPE projects get done in a rough draft in class, then the teacher collects up the rough draft, changes what needs to be changed, corrects them, gives them back and the kids copy/paste the corrected version into the official booklet.

New proposal stops the copy/paste bit