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

WRITTEN EXAMINERS 2019

135678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,119 ✭✭✭mtoutlemonde


    doc_17 wrote: »
    I rang the SEC last week and told them my students would be using pencils as that’s how they have been instructed since starting school. To tell them two weeks out is harsh. I hope it creates loads of problems for the SEC and none for the students.

    I thought this issue had been put to bed. I'm sure it's not the end of the world to use a pen instead of a pencil. If it were a major change to the paper fair enough but it's the use of a writing instrument. Online marking is the best thing the SEC have invested in, why are you making a big issue? Students will be reminded at the beginning of the exam to use pen instead of pencil by superintendent.

    Everytime I read the posts about this, I think of Bertie Ahern when trying use the e-voting machines, stating that 'Ireland was a laughing stock with our stupid old pencils' and look what happened there - do you want this (I'm sure) massive investment wasted?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭doc_17


    doc_17 wrote: »
    I rang the SEC last week and told them my students would be using pencils as that’s how they have been instructed since starting school. To tell them two weeks out is harsh. I hope it creates loads of problems for the SEC and none for the students.

    I thought this issue had been put to bed. I'm sure it's not the end of the world to use a pen instead of a pencil. If it were a major change to the paper fair enough but it's the use of a writing instrument. Online marking is the best thing the SEC have invested in, why are you making a big issue? Students will be reminded at the beginning of the exam to use pen instead of pencil by superintendent.

    Everytime I read the posts about this, I think of Bertie Ahern when trying use the e-voting machines, stating that 'Ireland was a laughing stock with our stupid old pencils' and look what happened there - do you want this (I'm sure) massive investment wasted?

    If it’s not a big deal it should have been easy to spell this out to them in September. No reason to do it 2 weeks except for gross stupidity. People making these decisions should make them earlier.

    The voting machines thing? Not sure how that is relevant to this but just to deal with it....They were suspected of being susceptible to manipulation and fraud. That’s why they weren’t used. Clear cut really.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭doc_17


    doc_17 wrote: »
    I rang the SEC last week and told them my students would be using pencils as that’s how they have been instructed since starting school. To tell them two weeks out is harsh. I hope it creates loads of problems for the SEC and none for the students.

    What do you hope to achieve by that? If the average 17/18 year old can't cope with an instruction to write in blue or black pen given a month's notice, they are not going to cope very well when they are out in the real world. If they make a mistake, they can put a line through it and move on. To be honest I can't see why students would get stressed, I can see that teachers whipping them into a frenzy about the type of pen to be used might stress them though.

    Mine have been getting the 'Don't be that student who writes in luminous pen, which is hard to read, or in pencil which smudges' for years. I've viewed plenty of scripts in August over the years and they've all managed to follow that basic instruction without their world falling apart.

    Jeez, you make it sound like I’m on a crusade! I hope to make them comfortable writing with whatever to write with. SEC said it wouldn’t be a problem as long as they used a dark pencil, just like they’ve always been told to use.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭sullivlo


    Just got my letter in the post. JC Science. 3 day marking conference in AIT. Reduction in script marking rate to €5.99 per script. If I don’t significantly increase script numbers corrected from last year (340 scripts @€;9 each) it won’t be worth my time doing it again. I’ll do it this year as it’s the new course so I’m curious as to how it is being marked.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭doc_17


    A 3 day marking conference? Is that normal? I know it’s the new course but seems a lot.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 998 ✭✭✭Random sample


    sullivlo wrote: »
    Just got my letter in the post. JC Science. 3 day marking conference in AIT. Reduction in script marking rate to €5.99 per script. If I don’t significantly increase script numbers corrected from last year (340 scripts @€;9 each) it won’t be worth my time doing it again. I’ll do it this year as it’s the new course so I’m curious as to how it is being marked.

    It’s a common level paper, so probably shorter than the higher level of old.

    Online marking subjects get an extra conference day this year. I don’t know If that will continue.

    With the lack of Admin in the first week, and not having to fill marking sheets, I’d imagine you will get through more papers than before.


  • Registered Users Posts: 998 ✭✭✭Random sample


    doc_17 wrote: »
    A 3 day marking conference? Is that normal? I know it’s the new course but seems a lot.

    Online marking gets an extra day, presumably for training in it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,371 ✭✭✭✭rainbowtrout


    sullivlo wrote: »
    Just got my letter in the post. JC Science. 3 day marking conference in AIT. Reduction in script marking rate to €5.99 per script. If I don’t significantly increase script numbers corrected from last year (340 scripts @€;9 each) it won’t be worth my time doing it again. I’ll do it this year as it’s the new course so I’m curious as to how it is being marked.


    And no Coursework B to correct this year. So marking time per scripts should be shorter.
    doc_17 wrote: »
    A 3 day marking conference? Is that normal? I know it’s the new course but seems a lot.

    I think JC Science used to be three days anyway with Coursework A/B and the paper.
    It’s a common level paper, so probably shorter than the higher level of old.

    Online marking subjects get an extra conference day this year. I don’t know If that will continue.

    With the lack of Admin in the first week, and not having to fill marking sheets, I’d imagine you will get through more papers than before.

    Yep, even the counting and numbering of scripts and filling in the question numbers on the answer book takes a few hours


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    sullivlo wrote: »
    Just got my letter in the post. JC Science. 3 day marking conference in AIT. Reduction in script marking rate to €5.99 per script. If I don’t significantly increase script numbers corrected from last year (340 scripts @€;9 each) it won’t be worth my time doing it again. I’ll do it this year as it’s the new course so I’m curious as to how it is being marked.
    I'm assuming people will be getting more scripts this year, since there's no CWB, so it should be a lot quicker to mark.
    The third day of the conference is to train people in online marking.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    I think JC Science used to be three days anyway with Coursework A/B and the paper.
    It used to be, but it's been two for several years now. The third this year is to train people in the online marking.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,371 ✭✭✭✭rainbowtrout


    RealJohn wrote: »
    It used to be, but it's been two for several years now. The third this year is to train people in the online marking.

    Ya, I moved to LC just before Coursework B came in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1 DKimmage


    Hi all,
    I've received an offer to correct JC Geography HL. I'm wondering how many scripts I will be expected to correct and will it be worth my while financially. Its 5.99 a script and 215 euro (or near enough to this) for conference and another 215 euro (or thereabouts) for attending a conference. What will my after tax figure look like?
    Is this something I will manage part time as I am working full time in July as a centre manager for a language school. Not sure if I will manage both or if I should just pick examiner or centre manager.
    Any advice would be appreciated greatly.
    Thank you.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,088 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    You won't manage it alongside a job, in fact I think it specifies that somewhere in the contract.

    Your tax depends on your other income, but you might end up with little more than half the rate per script. I know for another JC subject people got of the order of 400 scripts last year. This probably varies subject to subject.

    Worth doing to inform your own teaching, but not money wise unless you are on a low income.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    DKimmage wrote: »
    Is this something I will manage part time as I am working full time in July as a centre manager for a language school. Not sure if I will manage both or if I should just pick examiner or centre manager.
    Definitely pick one. You will not be able to do the marking part-time, nor should you try. The students deserve your full attention.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,578 ✭✭✭djemba djemba


    Just got my letter from the SEC also. Just checking a few things. For the travel allowance from your home/school is that a round trip or just to the conference? As my subject is a three day conference I presume I can claim for two overnights?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,119 ✭✭✭mtoutlemonde


    Just got my letter from the SEC also. Just checking a few things. For the travel allowance from your home/school is that a round trip or just to the conference? As my subject is a three day conference I presume I can claim for two overnights?

    Or 3 - only if you are leaving before 7:30 am


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭gaiscioch


    I've just been speaking with somebody who has been asked to correct HL for the LC, and it's not even for one of the subjects all schools got an urgent appeal seeking examiners for two weeks ago. I assumed when I didn't see that subject on the list that it was sorted, but it seems it isn't. How many other subjects are in a similar position?

    As this person has no teaching experience of the subject at that level except one post-qualification year of 5th-year teaching, they are afraid it would be too much for them to take on as they'd have to keep checking claims made by students. My advice was to go for it for the experience asap as it will help inform your teaching, look good on the cv and it's not something that's easy to do when you have little children.

    But it really is a joke. Both the net income of 40% last year, and the unnecessarily long wait for payment. Apparently this year the PAYE/USC/PRSI/tax is *only* 50% as they're not charging the PRD/ASC. The real amount (i.e. after deductions) which the state is paying to examiners is a pittance. The SEC/Department of Education so obviously need to treat people with more respect on these two issues. Basic stuff if they want people to return to do it each year.

    As of today, 7 June, these are the subjects which the SEC is still seeking examiners for at LC and JC levels:

    SEC examiners still needed


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,088 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    For those recruited as a Written Examiner, beware the paragraph in the letter of appointment that says if you take more papers than the average ('additional work') there will be an extra 25% payment per script.

    They discussed it at our conference, a number of us took extra packets in the last couple of days and then they reneged on paying any extra fee per script.

    It's baffling why they have problems recruiting and retaining examiners.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,371 ✭✭✭✭rainbowtrout


    spurious wrote: »
    For those recruited as a Written Examiner, beware the paragraph in the letter of appointment that says if you take more papers than the average ('additional work') there will be an extra 25% payment per script.

    They discussed it at our conference, a number of us took extra packets in the last couple of days and then they reneged on paying any extra fee per script.

    It's baffling why they have problems recruiting and retaining examiners.

    Did they say at the conference that the extra would be applied specifically to those packets? Because from what I remember last year that the SEC worked out the average number of scripts for each subject (so the number varied) and if your total was above that regardless of whether you took extra scripts or not then the surplus had the 25% applied


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,792 ✭✭✭Postgrad10


    They said that 25% thing with my subject last year. We were told it was any script over a certain average . I got oved it and it Never happened.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭Moody_mona


    Did they say at the conference that the extra would be applied specifically to those packets? Because from what I remember last year that the SEC worked out the average number of scripts for each subject (so the number varied) and if your total was above that regardless of whether you took extra scripts or not then the surplus had the 25% applied

    Yea ditto on that. Last year I think 420 was our golden number. We were only awarded the 25% bonus once we had completed the first 420.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,371 ✭✭✭✭rainbowtrout


    Moody_mona wrote: »
    Yea ditto on that. Last year I think 420 was our golden number. We were only awarded the 25% bonus once we had completed the first 420.

    420!!!! That’s a ridiculous number. I think ours was around 375


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,088 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    They said it at the conference and then when they were asking me if I would take the extras they were described as 'the ones we talked about at conference' but then no extra script rate once they were done.

    As usual, it's not a fortune or anything, but it leaves s bad taste.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,324 ✭✭✭happywithlife


    I got paid the extra allowance but it was worded on the payslip if I remember rightly. Think it wasn't down as +25% but say I corrected 100 more @the +25% I was paid for an extra 25 scripts. That's how they worked it in


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭Moody_mona


    420!!!! That’s a ridiculous number. I think ours was around 375

    I've never had less than 400 in my original haul, which I presume is why it's that bit extra. I've only accepted extra papers once and it was before they brought in the additional pay.


  • Registered Users Posts: 48,129 ✭✭✭✭km79


    How does the pay per script work in subjects where you only mark a certain question /questions ? The subjects that are done electronically

    I swore I’d never to them again but am considering doing science next year to get an idea of marking for new course

    Also how do you actually put the marks in on the scripts ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 998 ✭✭✭Random sample


    km79 wrote: »
    How does the pay per script work in subjects where you only mark a certain question /questions ? The subjects that are done electronically

    I swore I’d never to them again but am considering doing science next year to get an idea of marking for new course

    Also how do you actually put the marks in on the scripts ?

    I don’t know about the pay, I didn’t realise some subjects worked like that, but for the marks, you click and drag a tick to where you are awarding the marks and then click on the mark you are going to give. This can be seen on the screen then. I presume for the candidate, those marks can be seen when they digitally view that script.


  • Registered Users Posts: 998 ✭✭✭Random sample


    For anyone who didn’t get the extra 25% did you write to them? That’s disgraceful. I don’t think I went over the magic number for my subject last year.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,088 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    For anyone who didn’t get the extra 25% did you write to them? That’s disgraceful. I don’t think I went over the magic number for my subject last year.

    Yes I wrote and my Advising Examiner wrote too, as others in her group were in the same boat. I think she felt bad as she was the intermediary who got us to take the extra scripts and then we got stiffed on the money.

    We got a reply along the lines of 'that was some subjects not yours'. I sent in a scan of the original letter of appointment which did indeed say 'in some subjects', so that was their get out clause.

    IMO a clear misrepresentation on their part but anyway they won't catch me again.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 998 ✭✭✭Random sample


    Very sneaky of them.


Advertisement