Institute at Christmas

-Els-

well I did one of the revision courses for Maths when I did my Junior Cert and I found it good.I did it simply because I ahd a terrible teacher and i just didn't understand a lot of the course. I think its really good for a subject like Maths where you need a teacher to teach you and you need to understand the course.

I don't think it would be good for something like History or geography where all you have to do is sit down and work really hard and memorise stuff.

Crania

Well I did it anyway and found it brilliant, really class. Did Geography(Physical), Economics(Micro), German and Irish.

My Geography teacher was class, absolute legend of a man. Some great sayings and gave us some great notes.

Economics was brilliant also. Teacher was very good, went off on a lot of tangents though that had absolutely nothing to do with Econ. Did everything out in practice and found his notes to be quite comprehensive-excellent teacher.

German was unbelievably good I thought. We got an absolute rainforest of notes in it. There just seemed to be notes coming at you from all directions! Ah she was a great teacher aswell though, even if she said about 300 words in each sentence!

Unfortunately after have 3 great revision classes in Geog, Econ and German, it was tarnished slightly by an abysmal teacher. He truly was terrible! Crap notes, mainly printed off the internet and anything he did write had typo's all over it! Gave some awful tips also, he said we had to write 5 pages for the Irish essay/story-come on, I think that would be physically impossible-timewise!

Had such a great week in the 'Tute though, would highly recommend it and I'm really gonna miss the place, especially when i have to go back to my own school and teachers on Monday....!

JC 2K3

You had a week of school instead of holidays and you enjoyed it?

Crania

Yeah, of course I enjoyed it. I actually thought it was good fun. Going into town every morning, going into classes where teachers actually try to engage properly with students and make it interesting for them, meeting interesting and different people from all over the country, messing around town after school. Great craic I thought.

Anyway, I enjoy school, sure what would I have been doing at home only twiddling my thumbs and dreading doing some study all day!

1huge1

For the last week I have been doing a revision course in Mary I in Limerick, it was very helpful but wow was it long

started at 9 and finished at half 5 with 5 1hr30min classes.

glad its over but I did get a hell of a lot done in the week

Mark200

Yeah I did Physics in the institute over Christmas. I had Pat Doyle, he's a really good teacher. Brilliant about explaining things and unlike some teachers he doesn't just know the bare minimum, he knows everything so he can give us background information and knew the answers to any questions that were asked.

Great guy.

Fuascailt

I went to the Bruce College Revision course in UCC, and thought it was really worthwhile. I wasnt sure of what to expect and was really impressed. The teachers were extremely good and it really altered my view about grindschools in general

kkumk

It's ridiculous the way people are saying that the Institute is a waste of money when they've never even been there. I'm going to it this year for 6th year and the teachers REALLY are 10 times better; they clearly put alot of work in, never missing a class, compressing a two year course into one year sucessfully, researching past papers & making out excellent notes.

And yeah the notes are nothing compared to the teachers themselves, they're just helpful for revising. Everyone is so focused and it should be a model for all schools. Having gone to the Institute, if I had to return to being taught in my old school, I'd be seriously worried right now. Go to the Easter revision course, it will deffo be worth it in the end.

And yeah, Jean Kelly is an absolute legend As is James Campbell:D

rainbowtrout

kkumk wrote: »

It's ridiculous the way people are saying that the Institute is a waste of money when they've never even been there. I'm going to it this year for 6th year and the teachers REALLY are 10 times better; they clearly put alot of work in, never missing a class, compressing a two year course into one year sucessfully, researching past papers & making out excellent notes.

Teachers in places like the institute don't have any other work to do other than the classes they teach in the general scheme of things, they are not responsible for anything like extra curriculur activities. Also you will find a lot of teachers in places like the institute are not paid by the Dept of Education, not on contracts like those of teachers in normal schools, so it's in their best interests to be in every day.

kkumk wrote: »

Everyone is so focused and it should be a model for all schools.

I would imagine most students are focused when they(or rather their parents) have paid thousands to attend a grind school for the year, they're hardly doing it to start a career stacking shelves in the local supermarket. Grind schools are not a model for any school. It's not normal and does not cater for all types of student.

Crania

kkumk wrote: »

As is James Campbell:D[/B]

What a legend of a teacher! Give that man a can of coke! You've gotta expand like the elastic band guys and gals!

God, I sure do miss him.

JC 2K3

kkumk wrote: »

Having gone to the Institute, if I had to return to being taught in my old school, I'd be seriously worried right now.

I sympathise greatly with your apparent complete lack of any independence or self sufficiency.

The spoonfeeding ends when you go to college, kids.

kkumk

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Teachers in places like the institute don't have any other work to do other than the classes they teach in the general scheme of things, they are not responsible for anything like extra curriculur activities. Also you will find a lot of teachers in places like the institute are not paid by the Dept of Education, not on contracts like those of teachers in normal schools, so it's in their best interests to be in every day.






I would imagine most students are focused when they(or rather their parents) have paid thousands to attend a grind school for the year, they're hardly doing it to start a career stacking shelves in the local supermarket. Grind schools are not a model for any school. It's not normal and does not cater for all types of student.

Emm sorry but most teachers in the Institute also teach in another school so they have to do twice the amount of work as normal teachers as well as all the travelling during the day, and there are teachers that organise extra-curricular activities, such as Jean who does girls soccar, and Deirdre who does choir for example, but parents aren't playing 6grand for their children to play a few footie matchs and sing some songs. The Leaving Cert should be the main focus for those who want to get into a good college course and the teachers are right to put more time into teaching students than organising extra-curriculars.
Before you go making assumptions and embarrassing yourself you should do some research.

All students should have dedicated teachers for every subject, all students should be allowed to pick their own timetable and all students should have the oppurtunity to go to career talks, visit study guide counsellors and career guidance teachers on various occasions and also have round the clock study available 12 hours a day, 7 days a week.
I'm not saying that the money paid for the Institute is reasonable, but the fact is that you don't get that level of choice and education elsewhere, so people are willing to pay for it if it helps them to get the career they want. My point is that if all schools catered for students the way that the Institute does then there would be no need for the fee's to be so high.

JC 2K3

kkumk wrote: »

All students should have dedicated teachers for every subject, all students should be allowed to pick their own timetable and all students should have the oppurtunity to go to career talks, visit study guide counsellors and career guidance teachers on various occasions and also have round the clock study available 12 hours a day, 7 days a week.

We don't all need that kind of spoonfeeding.

I think it would be far more important that 17/18 year olds be told to get over themselves and be encouraged to be more independent and more accountable for their own study and results instead of blaming the school, the teacher etc.

Naikon

JC 2K3 wrote: »

We don't all need that kind of spoonfeeding.

I think it would be far more important that 17/18 year olds be told to get over themselves and be encouraged to be more independent and more accountable for their own study and results instead of blaming the school, the teacher etc.

Have to agree.
At the end of the day, it is down to the indivudual to cop on and get along
with his/her own business regardless of how ****ty a school is.

If you go to college with such an attitude and expect to be spoonfed notes or something, then you might be in for a nasty shock.
Lecturer's are not obliged to "help you every step of the way" so to speak.

Naikon

kkumk wrote: »

All students should have dedicated teachers for every subject, all students should be allowed to pick their own timetable and all students should have the oppurtunity to go to career talks, visit study guide counsellors and career guidance teachers on various occasions and also have round the clock study available 12 hours a day, 7 days a week.

And people in the third world should have basic human needs fufilled.
This ain't an ideal world...

Timans

Naikon wrote: »

Have to agree.
At the end of the day, it is down to the indivudual to cop on and get along
with his/her own business regardless of how ****ty a school is.

If you go to college with such an attitude and expect to be spoonfed notes or something, then you might be in for a nasty shock.
Lecturer's are not obliged to "help you every step of the way" so to speak.

I myself don't agree with paying for schooling, and I went to the Institute. But you could also argue that you choose your college, your course, ultimately your lecturers.

In Secondary School, you don't have this ample choice. You take what you're given.

JC 2K3

Because you're only a child....

Timans

Not at 17/18 though, are you?

You are, essentially, an "adult" yet you still have no control on how good/bad/ambivalent a teacher is.

You could get a teacher who misses 1 day a week to train the rugby team. This is out of your control but is detrimental to your education.

JSK 252

JC 2K3 wrote: »

I sympathise greatly with your apparent complete lack of any independence or self sufficiency.

The spoonfeeding ends when you go to college, kids.

You cant make a comparison between secondary school and university.

JC 2K3

Timans wrote: »

Not at 17/18 though, are you?

You are, essentially, an "adult" yet you still have no control on how good/bad/ambivalent a teacher is.

You could get a teacher who misses 1 day a week to train the rugby team. This is out of your control but is detrimental to your education.

A teacher missing one day a week is detrimential to your education?

And yes, you're still considered a child as long as you're in secondary school, although 6th year can be considered a transition between childhood and adulthood due to the responsibility the LC places on students. You're confused in your argument.

In school, because children are being dealt with, teachers have to teach them, make sure they understand things give them homework and make sure it's done etc.

In college, because adults who are totally responsible for themselves are being dealt with, lecturers just have to show up, give a lecture, perhaps give some assignments and leave. They don't have to make sure you do the work or that you pay attention.

Now you're arguing that at 17/18 you're an adult, therefore teachers should spoonfeed you more? I don't understand that really.

As I mentioned before, at 17/18 you're in 6th year and are in a transition period between childhood and adulthood. With adulthood comes responsibility and hence you should be taking the burden of study upon yourself, not expecting more spoonfeeding.

JSK 252 wrote: »

You cant make a comparison between secondary school and university.

Eh, why not? Timans just has and I don't see you objecting to that.

Timans

Ok, by your reasoning.

Why not get spoonfed as much as you like in Secondary School then, as you're still technically a child?

I am taking points directly out of your post for that statment.

You say in one post that you think it's ridiculous getting spoonfed in 6th year, then you say that you're still a child. Quite a contradiction.

JC 2K3

I clearly said that while you're still considered a child, 6th year is a transition between childhood and adulthood and more responsibility should be placed on you.

JSK 252

JC 2K3 wrote: »

A teacher missing one day a week is detrimential to your education?

And yes, you're still considered a child as long as you're in secondary school, although 6th year can be considered a transition between childhood and adulthood due to the responsibility the LC places on students. You're confused in your argument.

In school, because children are being dealt with, teachers have to teach them, make sure they understand things give them homework and make sure it's done etc.

In college, because adults who are totally responsible for themselves are being dealt with, lecturers just have to show up, give a lecture, perhaps give some assignments and leave. They don't have to make sure you do the work or that you pay attention.

Now you're arguing that at 17/18 you're an adult, therefore teachers should spoonfeed you more? I don't understand that really.

As I mentioned before, at 17/18 you're in 6th year and are in a transition period between childhood and adulthood. With adulthood comes responsibility and hence you should be taking the burden of study upon yourself, not expecting more spoonfeeding.


Eh, why not? Timans just has and I don't see you objecting to that.

God almighty do I have to spell it out for you. How can you compare secondary school to college and the differences in academic life in both?

Your telling me that spoonfeeding is the wrong way to go about it. Lets see emmmm we do 7/8 subjects for the leaving certificate. Half of those subjects we will never use again when we get into college. ( im using we in purpose to distingush indirectly between those already in college and those that are about to go into college etc etc. so I dont want you to read between those lines to find some kind of ''error'' in my statement ) Now for the majority of students you will have some kind of difficulty in at least one of the subjects you are studying for the leaving certificate. eg. English ( if your not langauge minded ) chemistry ( if your not scientific minded ), again this is a generalisation and does not cover everybody in the spectrum. I dont know a single individual who doesnt find some concept in some subject difficult dispite all the efforts of their teacher to explain the concept to the best of their ability. The difficulty could be minor or the difficulty could be quite severe which might in turn cause that individual to jeopardise their chances of getting into their respective courses.

The certain individual (s) wants to do bio chem in ucc for example. They are brilliant in chemistry, biology and have a reasonable grasp of higher level maths ( which is a bonus but not a neccessity ) but unfortunately they are terrible at french and Irish to the point that they will struggle to achieve the minimum matriculation requirement for the course not to mention in the first place the CAO points requirement. From what your saying and the ideology you have it seems that for this individual '' tough **** '' you have to do the work yourself in Irish and French as spoonfeeding will get you no where, when he/she only need to pass these subjects which means getting extra help in the form of grinds etc. He/she will never need to use those subjects again when he/ she gets into college. So whats wrong in getting the extra help they need?

In my opinion, I think the barrier to having a succesful career which requires third level qualifications is the leaving certificate. Our broad curriculum requires students to have a reasonable aptitude in a variety of different subjects when in actual fact we will probably for the most part use a couple of those subjects ever in our lifetime.

College is different. You have committed yourself to a course you love so you have to work at it no matter how tough it can be. Its correct that there is no spoonfeeding in college as what would the point be in the course. But for god sake dont try and stop a guy getting a PhD in Bio Chem just because he was crap at Irish at school. Thats crazy talk.

The way I see it is, if you love a certain course because you love certain subjects go for it no matter what obstacles you face, once you are their you never have to look back. Grinds or no grinds, its getting their that counts. Nobody is going to ask you did you get grinds in a certain subject when your 25.

JSK 252

Naikon wrote: »

And people in the third world should have basic human needs fufilled.
This ain't an ideal world...

But surely a rich country like the Republic of Ireland could provide such educational neccesities. It isnt an ideal world but whats third world countries got to do with it. Its the question of using what we have to our advantage. It aint rocket science like.

JC 2K3

I'm not going to derail this topic into a broad education vs. specialised education debate as well as a wider one on natural ability vs. hard work. You have your view, I have mine.

JC 2K3

JSK 252 wrote: »

But surely a rich country like the Republic of Ireland could provide such educational neccesities.

Necessities my ass. We have a very good education system. Surely it makes more sense to put resources into sectors like health that actually are in need of them.

Fad

HERE!
YOU TWO
STOP IT

the insititute can have its uses (regardless of my opinion of the money grubbing hell hole that it is)
it can give people confidence, and i dont mean stupid ''omg i gots the tute notes no need to study, lets go play in traffic'' confidence, as in people who are worried about a subject can realise given the proper stimulation that they actually do have aptitude at the subject

JSK 252

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Necessities my ass. We have a very good education system. Surely it makes more sense to put resources into sectors like health that actually are in need of them.

I feel they are neccesities. We have a very good education system. But why cant it be an excellent education system. It can always always be improved. There is always room for improvement. Thats what the government are supposed to do. Use our resources to the best of our ability to make improvements in all departments be it education or health etc.

kkumk

JC 2K3 wrote: »

We don't all need that kind of spoonfeeding.

I think it would be far more important that 17/18 year olds be told to get over themselves and be encouraged to be more independent and more accountable for their own study and results instead of blaming the school, the teacher etc.

In the Institute if you don't do your homework the teachers don't care, they don't constantly badger you for it, they just accept that you're the one that's not working and they can't force you to do the work. If you misbehave in class there is no "quiet down and do your work." it's just "get out of my class if you don't want to work." That's hardly spoonfeeding, especially in comparison to other schools.
The Institute is run more like a college than a school, therefore encouraging students to be independant and accountable for their own study.

JC 2K3

I'm confused now.

Why would you pay so much money if you're independant enough to be accountable for your own study?