Circular Number: 0037/2020

amacca wrote: »

theres obviously still a hell of a lot of subjectivity though too id assume?

different teachers may use different data etc etc.......dont put too much emphasis on mocks, use professional judgement etc

what do you mean by went through marking schemes.....did you look at a marking scheme in your subject and imagine what they would have got or are you talking about a marking scheme for project work they have submitted or something?

Used scheme for some of project work and how longer answers are marked in my subjects.

Obviously used knowledge I have of students to predict how they wud have done then.

Professional opinion at end of day is for each to decided how they implement

Bobtheman wrote: »

Sorry I forgot I was talking to King Solomein. You can attack me all you like but in the end its guesswork. I don't know or care what you're subject is-its still guesswork because unless you have corrected the LC lately-how can you say you are accurate or not? Who has checked YOUR Work? How accurate have your previous predictions been?? You can get hung up on the word 'inflate' all you like-it simply means err on the side of cautin. The mocks must be approached with caution plus kids do surge and there is no tablets of stone to work this out with. When they invent a time machine where my colleagues and I can use standardised testing and check it externally from 2018-20 then we would have an objective system. But we don't and please don't give the impression we have one now.

55 for a student whose grade has varied greatly sounds fair to me.

I've been marking papers for the SEC for 19 years, 16 of those at LC level, so ya I'd say I have a fair amount of experience of correcting LC. My previous predictions have been pretty much bang on.

Inflate does not mean err on the side of caution, it means the direct opposite. I never said this was an objective system, you've just made that up right now. And teachers have been given fair warning about including mock results in their deliberations because students can cheat the mocks.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

He did, he edited it out of his post while I was writing mine.

I have not decided anything

Bobtheman wrote: »

Sorry I got a bit emotional there. It was the wrong word choice- inflate. But I think you need to realise that the vast majority of teachers have not corrected. So you need to stop picking holes in the arguments of teachers who have not corrected and have a different subject to yours. What is your subject btw ?

The subject a teacher teaches is not relevant. You're going on about it taking weeks and are suggesting people are mad if they think they'll be done by the end of the week. You're suggesting giving a C to a student for whatever reasons..... but by your own admission you haven't read the documentation, which is something you really need to do. How can you comment on grading your student when you haven't read about what is entailed in the grading?

To say the subject does not matter is ridiculous.But you have a point. I have not read the document but I seriously doubt it will change my views
Yes the school matters. Middle class schools generate more data because parents are more involved.kids generate more work etc

You have clearly stated it's not objective. But be careful of thinking you know it all in however many LC subjects there are. My advice stands bang them up a few percent unless you are in the 10% or less miniority who correct regularly.

Bobtheman wrote: »

To say the subject does not matter is ridiculous.But you have a point. I have not read the document but I seriously doubt it will change my views
Yes the school matters. Middle class schools generate more data because parents are more involved.kids generate more work etc

You have clearly stated it's not objective. But be careful of thinking you know it all in however many LC subjects there are. My advice stands bang them up a few percent unless you are in the 10% or less miniority who correct regularly.

The application of the guidelines applies to all subjects. Schools/teachers generate data. If you choose to hold a monthly class test then you have lots of data. If you choose to hold no class tests, and only go with christmas and summer tests you have less data. You can be in any type of school and make that choice.

I have not claimed to know it all. I'm following the guidelines as they are set out. You should have a fair idea how a student will get on in their exams whether you correct or not. Teachers advise students of considering changing levels because they know a student isn't able for HL. They don't need to mark exams to do that.

Buddhas belly wrote: »

Hi, hope it is ok to ask this question here? My niece is in leaving cert and she is wondering if the previous exam results from the school will affect her grade. Eg. in science and languages they have excelled in the past few years and she thinks this may boost her grade, which would be great. Is this the case or should she be more realistic regarding her grades?

I’m sure her school has provided her with all the information available already but just in case here it is
https://www.education.ie/en/Learners/Information/State-Examinations/a-guide-to-calculated-grades-for-leaving-certificate-students-2020.pdf

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/2f07eb-leaving-cert-2020-information/#information-for-leaving-cert-students

That’s it. No teacher can add anything to it for students .

Apologies to Rainbow trout but I think I was misunderstood. We all have varying levels of Data. Some have corrected at LC levels -MOST have not.
I didn't give a huge amount of tests because my class attendance varied wildly and it was hard to get any homework from them. I had no idea this was coming-who did?
I do have students who averaged mid 40s on Exams but got 70% in the mock. Kids often do better on the day. They would also normally have had March-May Teaching. I was making huge headway in March before this. A lot of students only really tune in the last few months.
Thus it is not a huge leap to move a student up by 8% in their grade from 47 to 55%. It is erring on the side of caution. Also I don't take the Mock as Gospel.
I doubt the guidelines say just use Tests-there is your professional knowledge of the student. That is allowable?
So it's not throwing a dart at a dartboard or anything like that. But there will be random guesses no matter what anybody says.
Because even class tests are quite random. Perhaps we should have all been forced to correct at least once but alack-alas that was not the case!

Bobtheman wrote: »

Apologies to Rainbow trout but I think I was misunderstood. We all have varying levels of Data. Some have corrected at LC levels -MOST have not.
I didn't give a huge amount of tests because my class attendance varied wildly and it was hard to get any homework from them. I had no idea this was coming-who did?
I do have students who averaged mid 40s on Exams but got 70% in the mock. Kids often do better on the day. They would also normally have had March-May Teaching. I was making huge headway in March before this. A lot of students only really tune in the last few months.
Thus it is not a huge leap to move a student up by 8% in their grade from 47 to 55%. It is erring on the side of caution. Also I don't take the Mock as Gospel.
I doubt the guidelines say just use Tests-there is your professional knowledge of the student. That is allowable?
So it's not throwing a dart at a dartboard or anything like that. But there will be random guesses no matter what anybody says.
Because even class tests are quite random. Perhaps we should have all been forced to correct at least once but alack-alas that was not the case!

Kids often do much better on the day but kids that average mid 40s suddenly springing something over 70 in the mocks..... I call cheats, yes one in a class of 30 may achieve this jump but I still find it extremely suspicious !! I would base my prediction closer to their average