If you could change the LC or course content what...

p1akuw47h5r3it

If you had the chance to change the L.C what would you do?

Or if you could change the content of a course, what would you change?

p1akuw47h5r3it

What I would do is:

In 5th year, you do 7 subjects inc. the mandatory 3.

Then in 6th year your able to drop 3 subjects, whichever ones you like.

This means you could concentrate on the subjects you need to get into uni or wherever you want to go. It would save having to waste your time doing unimportant subjects that you don't need.

Aisling(",)

id half the irish course..less fricking poetry.
and id have easier leamhthusicints because i dont have a clue what theyre on abaout half the time

p1akuw47h5r3it

Aisling(",) wrote: »

id half the irish course..less fricking poetry.
and id have easier leamhthusicints because i dont have a clue what theyre on abaout half the time

yeah defo

Gavin "shels"

More pratical work involved in the three sciences, possibly like on the Junior Cert when you have to write out 30 experiements in a booklet and it's work 20% or something along the lines.

Possibly something in English aswell, like say you get an essay a month for 6 months and that amounts to 20% of your results or something similar, think there's too much pressure when it comes to English.

Shacklebolt

Cut one essay from the higher level history paper its way too intense for the time you are given. Or else get rid of those pointless document questions.

Get rid of the bonus points for doing subjects through Irish.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Myth wrote: »

Get rid of the bonus points for doing subjects through Irish.

Yeah I think that's real unfair

PurpleFistMixer

INCREASE bonus points for stuff through Irish! (Nah, I'm kidding. Gaelscoil students already get the bonus of being able to speak fluent Irish. I'm jealous. )

I'd change the Irish course to be more like the Music course... yes. Everyone would have to do core elements: spoken, written/grammar, literature. Then you could choose to specialise further in one element for the final whatever percent (maybe 30). So that way if you chose oral etc., you'd just have a longer oral exam/higher standard expected. If you chose written/grammar you'd focus a lot of translation and more advanced grammar, and writing essays/articles etc., if you chose literature well you'd do more of that. I'd visualise that in the core literature element it would be focused a lot on folklore and béaloideas, of course not solely, but if you specialised you'd study the dán díreach and stuff.
Of course it's not perfect, what would happen is that a teacher would choose their option and force students to do it, but there's a good chance it'd be the Oral option, which isn 't too bad. And where Stair na Teanga comes in, I'm not sure, but I like that option and I'd like for it to remain.

I'd change the CAO system that it gave weightings to particular subjects depending on the course you're applying for. It'd be unfair for obscure subjects to be given extra points (ie had tech graph been given double points to get on to my course I'd be livid because it wasn't offered in my school), but certainly the ones required for specific matriculation (that is to say, they all require english, irish + language, but if it's a science subject those would be weighted normally, and the science subject would be doubled in points, or something). Yes, it would be more complex, but I don't think it would be prohibitively difficult to do. Interviews etc. from colleges would be lovely but that's a question for the universities themselves rather than for the CAO system, imo. (Since places like DIT already do do interviews for some subjects...)

I wouldn't increase emphasis on the experiments in the sciences, though. There's enough as it is, IMO (the guaranteed 3 qurestions on experiments in physics), and not everyone even wants to be an experimental scientist. : p (Then again, I am biased in studying Theoretical Physics.) However what I would do is increase the standard of the experiments, and add in a little bit of error calculation and uncertainty, because that's definitely the worst thing about doing experiments when you get to college. People aren't prepared at all.

And in general? I'd STOP DUMBING THE COURSES DOWN. If people are failing maths in their droves, I'd bloody well make the teaching, particularly the standard at primary level, better. Making the LC easier is just going to pass the problem on to people failing at 3rd level. Maths should only be fundamentally difficult for people with numeracy-related learning difficulties. Everyone should be comfortable with manipulation of equations by LC at LEAST.

I'd increase continuous assessment for the LC. Maybe something like the A-Levels where you have part of your exams in 5th year. (Not to say you'd be scrapping a subject after that, just that you'd have some of that out of the way.) More course-work, anyway. What someone said about doing an English essay could be good, only make it say, a project on some writer. Or a project on a particular style in literature.

And of course, regarding the entire entity that is the LC, I'd love if we could be able to forget about it now and again in the classroom, so that we could learn for the love of learning, as oppose to cram different exam techniques and styles. For the last two years of secondary school (indeed one could potentially argue similar for the JC) all we do is learn how to sit the leaving cert. We learn other things along the way, alright, but stuff like, "Hey, what IS integration?" (someone asked this in a lecture I had a few weeks ago) should not be ignored for the sake of "When a question like this comes up, you differentiate this and then...".

As for physics, I'd bring back PROPER thermodynamics. IMO it's one of the most interesting aspects of practical physics, and apparently it used to be covered in much greater detail on the syllabus. Now all we have is "This is what specific heat capacity is. Run along, children. No need to understand precisely what temperature IS, oh no. Nothing to do with the kinetic energy of the molecules. Oh no. Sure, it's not like that would make understanding the difference between temperature and heat far easier."
Bah, humbug.

Art History... where to begin. The problem is this: The course is too large. Because you have to write on only 3 topics and you have to write 4/5 pages on each, you need to know them very well. But while there is a large amount of choice on the paper, the sheer size of the course reduces this down to: "You have a lot of choice if you know everything that has happened in Art over the last 2000 years in 5-page-essay-detail." What they should do is either break it into a higher number of smaller essays, or give the exam paper a proper bit of choice - ie there will always be a question on prechristian Ireland, and you know that, so you can choose to specialise in that part of Irish Art and do it well. I know it's already like this to an extent, ie newgrange or high crosses come up almost every year, but could they not formalise it? You know.. you see your Irish Art question, and there are 3 suboptions - Pre and Early Christian, that middle bit containing georgian architecture, and Modern. Then you would either have to do a small essay on one from each, or a long essay from one of them.
I don't think art history should be scrapped, but all too often does an amazing artist get a crappy result in their LC just because they got unlucky with the essay choices on the day. For English etc. I am fully in favour of covering sufficient options so that will never happen (ie do 5 poets), but for art.. when the exam is worth 37.5% of your grade, it should not warrant the same dedication as a full subject.

And I cba ranting about the rest of the subjects I did, because I need some breakfast. (I am quite happy with how Music works. There you go.)

PurpleFistMixer

Also: (sticking this in a new post because of people who will "tl;dr" my above one) I think if people want to debate the extra points for doing it through Irish, starting a new thread would be beneficial. I mean, it could fall under the scope of this one, but it's a contentious enough issue that I'd say it warrants its own thread, while this one could be kept for other, perhaps less-often-aired grievances. We shall see, anyway.

Fad

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

I wouldn't increase emphasis on the experiments in the sciences, though. There's enough as it is, IMO (the guaranteed 3 qurestions on experiments in physics), and not everyone even wants to be an experimental scientist. : p (Then again, I am biased in studying Theoretical Physics.) However what I would do is increase the standard of the experiments, and add in a little bit of error calculation and uncertainty, because that's definitely the worst thing about doing experiments when you get to college. People aren't prepared at all.

And in general? I'd STOP DUMBING THE COURSES DOWN. If people are failing maths in their droves, I'd bloody well make the teaching, particularly the standard at primary level, better. Making the LC easier is just going to pass the problem on to people failing at 3rd level. Maths should only be fundamentally difficult for people with numeracy-related learning difficulties. Everyone should be comfortable with manipulation of equations by LC at LEAST.



And of course, regarding the entire entity that is the LC, I'd love if we could be able to forget about it now and again in the classroom, so that we could learn for the love of learning, as oppose to cram different exam techniques and styles. For the last two years of secondary school (indeed one could potentially argue similar for the JC) all we do is learn how to sit the leaving cert. We learn other things along the way, alright, but stuff like, "Hey, what IS integration?" (someone asked this in a lecture I had a few weeks ago) should not be ignored for the sake of "When a question like this comes up, you differentiate this and then...".

I agree with most (if not all) of your post

I think theres enough of an emphasis on experiments......Had they followed through with their original intention of having a practical exam instead of section A in PHY and CHEM and section B in Bio, I think that would have been better. However as it stand, the system aint bad, the threat of an inspection means we have to do the experiments, so at least we get to do them (@ JC level I think I did 4 or 5 experiment, but then again I did the old course and I'm not sure if the exp were mandatory)

Again with Stop Dumbing Course down, especially Science courses. I feel that I could handily enough get into an English University but there'd be so much undirected catching up to do that I wouldn't even like to try. Looking at the old Biology syllabus, it looks like theres alot more work to do, but that said, it looks easier to understand. Same with Chem, but I dunno about Physics, Maths isnt exactly a strong point of mine, so I wouldnt like to impeed myself if I were to go back in time

As you say, with things like Maths, I'd love to actually know what I'm doing. Like differentiation at OL is insanely easy, but I have no idea what I'm doing, I know I'm supposedly measuring the rate of change of two variable or something, but how am I doing it, why isnt there any explanation. Had I knew that things would be adequately explained to me, I would have absolutely done HL. The HL course is meant to be insanely long though.

And as for Art. Art is meant to be a relatively practical subject, it offers people who are artistically minded, to get the same number of points as any other subject in the CAO system, but no! They tack on Art History, and I would mind but for such a pointlessly high mark too, they should either have art at a lower percentage, and if you dont work at it you an in theory get more than a C or keep it at the same mark, and reduce the course. I dont do art, but seeing the fustration of some of my friends at theyre ridiculous course.......

andyman

I'd split up English into two subjects, English Language and English Literature, making English Language compulsory.

In my humble opinion, there is just too much you need to learn for English in the LC. At least 5 poets with at least 4 poems from each, an entire Shakespearian Tragedy inside out and 3 other texts for comparitives. Just too much content and understanding in my opinion.

PurpleFistMixer

andyman wrote: »

I'd split up English into two subjects, English Language and English Literature, making English Language compulsory.

In my humble opinion, there is just too much you need to learn for English in the LC. At least 5 poets with at least 4 poems from each, an entire Shakespearian Tragedy inside out and 3 other texts for comparitives. Just too much content and understanding in my opinion.

Yeah, that's a good idea. And then we might actually learn some GRAMMAR.

myfatherrsson

Myth wrote: »

Get rid of the bonus points for doing subjects through Irish.

You seriously have no idea what you're on about! If anything students doing them through irish dont get enough points at all! Its so hard to do em in Irish and the amount of effort it takes we honestly dont get enough credit for it! I mean take history, geography, physics and CHEMISTRY! Try doing them in all in irish learnin what easamh heitrileatach is! Seriously Fair Focks to gaelgeoirs! :cool::cool:

SligoBrewer

andyman wrote: »

I'd split up English into two subjects, English Language and English Literature, making English Language compulsory.

In my humble opinion, there is just too much you need to learn for English in the LC. At least 5 poets with at least 4 poems from each, an entire Shakespearian Tragedy inside out and 3 other texts for comparitives. Just too much content and understanding in my opinion.

We've the course finished twice already, by December. Too much to learn? I think not.

I would agree with what your saying though about splitting up English into English lit and English lan. The same should be done with Irish though. With Language being compulsory in both. The Irish course certainly is too broad for non-native speakers

MathsManiac

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

I'd change the CAO system that it gave weightings to particular subjects depending on the course you're applying for. It'd be unfair for obscure subjects to be given extra points (ie had tech graph been given double points to get on to my course I'd be livid because it wasn't offered in my school), but certainly the ones required for specific matriculation (that is to say, they all require english, irish + language, but if it's a science subject those would be weighted normally, and the science subject would be doubled in points, or something).

So, it'd be unfair to give extra points for tech graph when it's relevant (because they don't have it in your school) but it'd fine to give extra points to physics when it's relevant (because they do have it in your school). :rolleyes:

Incidentally, tech graph had about 5500 candidates last year and physics had about 7000, so it's a bit of a push to call one obscure and the other not.

The Points Commission considered this idea and rejected it, despite the fact that it had a lot of support from students. (See http://odtl.dcu.ie/mirror/irlgov/educ/pointcommreport99.html#s5.1 for their reasons, which are worth noting even if one disagrees.)

Interestingly, they also recommended that the few places who still give bonus points for maths should discontinue doing so.

PurpleFistMixer

MathsManiac wrote: »

So, it'd be unfair to give extra points for tech graph when it's relevant (because they don't have it in your school) but it'd fine to give extra points to physics when it's relevant (because they do have it in your school). :rolleyes:

Incidentally, tech graph had about 5500 candidates last year and physics had about 7000, so it's a bit of a push to call one obscure and the other not.

My apologies, I thought physics was far more widely done.

The point remains though, that physics was a mandatory requirement for my course, whereas tech graph wasn't. Giving extra points to physics wouldn't discriminate unfairly against anyone in the course. (Except possibly non-LC students, but I don't know how they do their thing.)

Fad

myfatherrsson wrote: »

You seriously have no idea what you're on about! If anything students doing them through irish dont get enough points at all! Its so hard to do em in Irish and the amount of effort it takes we honestly dont get enough credit for it! I mean take history, geography, physics and CHEMISTRY! Try doing them in all in irish learnin what easamh heitrileatach is! Seriously Fair Focks to gaelgeoirs! :cool::cool:

But you've been learning those subjects entirely through Irish since 1st year.

And at the end of it all, we still have to do the same Irish Paper as you guys, which isnt exactly fair tbh, talking to a girl in the Gaeltacht in Kerry (As in she lives there) I learned that she had the entire Pros/Poetry/Paper 2 in general entirely covered in 5th year, along with a fair bit of Prep for Paper 1, they dont exactly need help with the oral aspect as the have to communicate through it anyway, same goes for the aural.

So while it mightnt be the fairest option, I dont really think that All Irish School should have the same Paper for Irish, but at the same thime they could be allowed to have a different English Paper.

I honestly think there should be a distinction between the two.

myfatherrsson

Fad wrote: »

But you've been learning those subjects entirely through Irish since 1st year.

And at the end of it all, we still have to do the same Irish Paper as you guys, which isnt exactly fair tbh, talking to a girl in the Gaeltacht in Kerry (As in she lives there) I learned that she had the entire Pros/Poetry/Paper 2 in general entirely covered in 5th year, along with a fair bit of Prep for Paper 1, they dont exactly need help with the oral aspect as the have to communicate through it anyway, same goes for the aural.

So while it mightnt be the fairest option, I dont really think that All Irish School should have the same Paper for Irish, but at the same thime they could be allowed to have a different English Paper.

I honestly think there should be a distinction between the two.

You're making it sound as though it was easy though. As in, we've spent six years doing all the same subjects as you but through the medium of Irish, we've gone to the trouble and have in actual fact put in more work as a result so theres every reason to reward us bonus points! We have to make twice as much effort because at the end of the day English is still our first language no different from you and its still hard learnin it all in Irish and then having to know what it means in English.

Regarding doing the same Irish paper as the rest of the country, Id agree with the idea of us doing a harder irish paper, the Leaving Cert Irish course is ridiculously easy! But I think if that were to be implemented then it should carry more weight than the Common Irish paper, it would be, afterall, more advanced. But as it stands we're all doing the same one and I think it very fair because as ive said we've made the effort of speaking irish for 6 years, you didnt, we've every right to find the LC Irish paper easy.

Different English paper? Why? Our linguistic abilities probably outweigh most of the country's why would we need an easier paper? We can still speak english like the rest of you and are no less able to do the course.

I dont want to assume how well you are at speaking Irish or anybody for that matter but the point I want to make is that students who attend Irish schools for be it the love of the language, the challenge, or the bonus points are setting themselves up for a heavier workload than anyone else and deserve every right to have bonus points awarded and we are in fact not rewarded enough! 10% of what we didnt get is what I think is the highest bonus scheme. peanuts

Fad

myfatherrsson wrote: »

You're making it sound as though it was easy though. As in, we've spent six years doing all the same subjects as you but through the medium of Irish, we've gone to the trouble and have in actual fact put in more work as a result so theres every reason to reward us bonus points! We have to make twice as much effort because at the end of the day English is still our first language no different from you and its still hard learnin it all in Irish and then having to know what it means in English.

Regarding doing the same Irish paper as the rest of the country, Id agree with the idea of us doing a harder irish paper, the Leaving Cert Irish course is ridiculously easy! But I think if that were to be implemented then it should carry more weight than the Common Irish paper, it would be, afterall, more advanced. But as it stands we're all doing the same one and I think it very fair because as ive said we've made the effort of speaking irish for 6 years, you didnt, we've every right to find the LC Irish paper easy.

Different English paper? Why? Our linguistic abilities probably outweigh most of the country's why would we need an easier paper? We can still speak english like the rest of you and are no less able to do the course.

I dont want to assume how well you are at speaking Irish or anybody for that matter but the point I want to make is that students who attend Irish schools for be it the love of the language, the challenge, or the bonus points are setting themselves up for a heavier workload than anyone else and deserve every right to have bonus points awarded and we are in fact not rewarded enough! 10% of what we didnt get is what I think is the highest bonus scheme. peanuts

I have my reservations as to wether its actually much extra work seeing as you've only ever been taught through the medium of Irish, I would regard it as the same.

My point on having a harder Irish Paper and an easier English Paper, is that you wouldnt get any extra points for the Harder Irish, and you'd get the same for the Slightly Lower English Paper.

I absolutely love Irish and enjoy speaking it, but I didnt have much of a choice when it came to choosing a school (Long story, doesnt really matter). But the way I see it is, that you choose to go to a Gaelscoil because you liked the language, thus you consented at the very begining to be taught entirely through Irish, why should you be rewarded for something you elected to do? Its not like anyone forced you to go to a Gaelscoil. Should I get extra marks for being made do it through English even though I would have preferred to conduct my education through Irish?

Also Bonus Marks:

examinations.ie wrote:

Bonus marks at the rate of 10 per cent of the marks obtained will be given to a candidate who obtains less than 75 per cent of the total marks in the case of the following subjects:- Latin, Greek, Classical Studies, Hebrew Studies, History, Geography, Physics, Chemistry, Physics and Chemistry, Biology, Science, Business, Economics, Economic History, Agricultural Science, Agricultural Economics, Home Economics, Music, Business Studies, History and Appreciation of Art, Civic, Social and Political Education, Religious Education, Arabic, LCVP Link Modules - written component only.

Bonus marks at the rate of 5 per cent will be given to a candidate who obtains less than 75 per cent of the total marks in the case of the following subjects:- French, German, Italian, Spanish, Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, Accounting, Engineering, Construction Studies, Materials Technology (Wood), Metalwork, Technology, Typewriting, Russian, Japanese.

Bonus marks at the rate of 3 per cent will be given to a candidate who obtains less than 75 per cent of the total marks in the case of the subject Art, Craft, Design (Junior Certificate).

Above 75 per cent the bonus will be subjected to a uniform reduction until the candidate who scores 100 per cent gets no bonus.

No bonus will be given in the case of the following subjects:- Technical Graphics, Technical Drawing, Leaving Certificate Art (other than History and Appreciation of Art).

For the purpose of the award of bonus marks, Mathematics, Paper I and Paper II, will be treated as separate subjects.

Candidates who answer partly in Irish and partly in English will receive no bonus marks.

myfatherrsson

Fad wrote: »

Its not like anyone forced you to go to a Gaelscoil. Should I get extra marks for being made do it through English even though I would have preferred to conduct my education through Irish?

Now you're just twisting the scenario! Its not about what language you chose to study in its the level of difficulty and stress associated with studying through that language! You can put any rhetoric into that context!! Should I get more points because I was made do supervised study yada yada yada!


The bottom line is the fact we made the conscious effort to learn the same subjuects as you but through a less used language means we have to work twice as hard to achieve the same points as you. Yes it gets much easier with the progress of time nevertheless nach gceapann tu ag deireadh an lae go mbeadh se nios easca agam mo thuairim a leiriu tri mean an Bhearla na thar an Gaeilge? The government obviously implements this points system to allow for the difference in grade that would be expected of students doing the exams in irish, and no doubt to reward those who are keeping this dying language alive and to attract more students to the idea. It makes little difference to you its not like theres points being deducted from you for doing it in english.

nobodythere

Let's see...

English, give you the poems and texts in the exams, screw learning stuff off. Also shorten the english paper. Everyone's hands were ****ed after the exam

Maths, less proofs, get rid of matrices as it's terribly explained in all textbooks (didn't actually get what they were about in school) and the **** you learn with them you'll pretty much have to forget for college.

Also a general firing of physics, irish, english, and accounting teachers, most of whom found their jobs in a lucky dip. In retrospect of my school days, some of my teachers hadn't a clue what they were talking about. Things that confused the living hell out of me in school turned out to be very simple and straightforward but was explained completely arseways.

I'd definitely try and increase the emphasis on understanding in subjects like maths, physics and chemistry etc. It's funny, ask people in an honours maths class about topics such as vectors or calculus, and most of them just assume they're made up for school; they don't understand that they actually have real applications (Maybe that's just indicative of the kind of people who do honours maths in my school, but I assume is like that in most places).

I think it was PurpleFistMixer who already said about learning; I'd try and get people to learn for the sake of learning; not just because we need to for exams.

As has been said numerous times, I'd stop dumbing down subjects. It's ridiculous; subjects like physics and chemistry, and to a lesser extent honours maths, are so simple it's retarded; people wishing to do science or maths in college have a huge shock before them (Not that I do science or maths in college yet, but I happen to know what some of it is like).

And I'd agree with dividing English into two subjects: Literature and Language.

That's about it I think.

p1akuw47h5r3it

myfatherrsson wrote: »

You seriously have no idea what you're on about! If anything students doing them through irish dont get enough points at all! Its so hard to do em in Irish and the amount of effort it takes we honestly dont get enough credit for it! I mean take history, geography, physics and CHEMISTRY! Try doing them in all in irish learnin what easamh heitrileatach is! Seriously Fair Focks to gaelgeoirs! :cool::cool:

I totaly disagree...

Firstly, If if was that hard why don't they just do it in English.

Also, the majority (if not all) of people who do the LC thru Irish are from gaeltacht areas where Geailge is the "1st" language. Therefore they have an adv. just because of where they where born.

p1akuw47h5r3it

myfatherrsson wrote: »

You're making it sound as though it was easy though. As in, we've spent six years doing all the same subjects as you but through the medium of Irish, we've gone to the trouble and have in actual fact put in more work as a result so theres every reason to reward us bonus points! We have to make twice as much effort because at the end of the day English is still our first language no different from you and its still hard learnin it all in Irish and then having to know what it means in English.

Regarding doing the same Irish paper as the rest of the country, Id agree with the idea of us doing a harder irish paper, the Leaving Cert Irish course is ridiculously easy! But I think if that were to be implemented then it should carry more weight than the Common Irish paper, it would be, afterall, more advanced. But as it stands we're all doing the same one and I think it very fair because as ive said we've made the effort of speaking irish for 6 years, you didnt, we've every right to find the LC Irish paper easy.

Different English paper? Why? Our linguistic abilities probably outweigh most of the country's why would we need an easier paper? We can still speak english like the rest of you and are no less able to do the course.

I dont want to assume how well you are at speaking Irish or anybody for that matter but the point I want to make is that students who attend Irish schools for be it the love of the language, the challenge, or the bonus points are setting themselves up for a heavier workload than anyone else and deserve every right to have bonus points awarded and we are in fact not rewarded enough! 10% of what we didnt get is what I think is the highest bonus scheme. peanuts

You say you went thru a lot of trouble to do the courses in Irish... Why didn't you just do them thru English.

If you live in the gaeltacht, are you not suppost to speak Irish all the time??

ironictoaster

Have an English oral exam

geurrp the yard

Fad wrote: »

I agree with most (if not all) of your post
As you say, with things like Maths, I'd love to actually know what I'm doing. Like differentiation at OL is insanely easy, but I have no idea what I'm doing, I know I'm supposedly measuring the rate of change of two variable or something, but how am I doing it, why isnt there any explanation. Had I knew that things would be adequately explained to me, I would have absolutely done HL. The HL course is meant to be insanely long though.
QUOTE]

I was thinking along the same lines. I think alot of people that are doing maths for the leaving cert dont auctually know what they doing when solving a problem. I dont see the benefit of memorising formula after formula or rote learning a proof, weres the learning involved? I think there should be a more emphasis on especially in the areas of maths to its applications rather than its memorised way of thinking. Maybe if ICT was introduced to certain subjects,it would combat this problem.

Another thing that I found in some subjects when i did my leaving was that i struggled for time finishing the paper. That may well be down to poor time management but whats the harm of increasing the exam time an extra 10 minutes?

Someone mentioned a oral english exam, I think thats a great idea. Nice and practical! Communication skills are very important in most aspects of every day life and way more beneficial than quoting something out of macbeth in a language(olde english) that no one speaks.

LivingDeadGirl

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

As has been said numerous times, I'd stop dumbing down subjects. It's ridiculous; subjects like physics and chemistry, and to a lesser extent honours maths, are so simple it's retarded

I don't do physics or chemistry, but I do honours maths, and I find this comment highly insulting, who are you to decide honours maths is so simple it's 'retarded'? I am also 'retarded' for finding it difficult? Why don't you get down off your high horse and realise that not everyone has the levels of numeracy that you have.

LivingDeadGirl

LivingDeadGirl wrote: »

I don't do physics or chemistry, but I do honours maths, and I find this comment highly insulting, who are you to decide honours maths is so simple it's 'retarded'? I am also 'retarded' for finding it difficult? Why don't you get down off your high horse and realise that not everyone has the levels of numeracy that you have.

I didn't mean it in that sense, I probably didn't make it clear enough. I didn't say it was retared, I said it's level of difficulty was, or at least I meant to say that. Compare LC Maths with A-Level maths for example, it's a good bit easier. From what I've read about Project Maths (the new maths course), it seems even 'easier' (and I know easier is subjective) than the current one. I was meerly saying that dumbing things down is 'retarded', I didn't mean that the course was simple (reading my old post now, I can see it's phrased that way, which I didn't mean), nor the people that do it. Anyway, sorry if I offended, I honestly didn't mean to. And for the record, I struggle with honours maths myself, so I'm not on a high horse.

LivingDeadGirl

Thanks for clearing that up, makes way more sense now. Only thing I've heard about the new maths course is that there are 6 questions but you have to do them all, no choice at all, my teacher said it'll be more difficult if anything.

PurpleFistMixer

I have heard horror stories about the new maths course. Stuff like the hardest trig question will be "solve nsin(ntheta)=0 for n" and such madness. I wish they would stop butchering the maths course.