Making the leaving harder??

stainluss

randylonghorn wrote: »

The reality is that 18 year olds have no more moral or actual right to a college place than a 25 or 30 or even a 40 year old.

Not to mention, ofc, the obvious fact that *most* mature students enter college by a different mechanism, and don't really impact on your chances of a place in any case.

They do if my idea is correct, whereby many are going in as they have nothing to do, and due to the supplements you get etc. Much in the same way a 40 year old who genuinely wanted the qualification would have a moral right over some 18 year old who just wants to go for the drink and the craic.

Yeah, I hope this is true, if it is then I wouldnt care what motives the matures have, but there is a lot of varying info going around about it. People are saying different things. As I said before im not personally affected, but its just my viewpoint on it.

I dont intend to generalise, but Im talking about a certain amount of mature students who would have caused the rise in demand.

rainbowtrout

whippedcream wrote: »

True, but i think students should have confidence in their text books and say to themselves 'thisn is all i need to know' not 'ill ask everything thats not in the book' my art histroy book was particularly bad so my teacher, who is excellent, though us by powerpoints and handouts of them..so

Yes but the reality is that the exam is based on the syllabus not on any textbook as to base it on a textbook would be biased against students who did not use that particular textbook. Also the SEC don't publish the books, publishing companies do, and they are out for profit. So if they've left out a few details here and there but know they've produced a book that will sell, i'm sure they are not too worried.

A case in point is Ag Science. Anyone who studies the subject probably has the green book from Folens. It was published in 1992 for a syllabus that was written in 1969. Gill and MacMillan sent general letters to schools last year asking if teachers were interested in writing new textbooks in any subject (that says it all really). I emailed them about ag science out of curiosity and the email I got back basically said 'Sorry, we wouldn't sell enough copies to warrant publication'. That was the general gist of it anyway. So it's easy to improve and change core subject books, they'll sell by the truckload. In minority subjects, the publishers won't make enough money so they'll just keep selling the one they already have, if it's not good enough, tough luck, it's all that's out there so you're going to buy it anyway.

randylonghorn

stainluss wrote: »

They do if my idea is correct, whereby many are going in as they have nothing to do, and due to the supplements you get etc. Much in the same way a 40 year old who genuinely wanted the qualification would have a moral right over some 18 year old who just wants to go for the drink and the craic.

Now you're beginning to think along the right track.

In my experience, the vast majority of mature students are intent on doing well; they have seen a bit of the real world, and have far more of a sense of the value of a qualification in that milieu than do those straight out of school.

Yes, ofc you will find a few dossers, but tbh (and I have worked with both groups at third level) you will find *far more* of that ilk in the 18-21 age group.

And that's understandable ... I'm not getting all high and mighty on that score, you won't get those years back again, and you should certainly enjoy them ... but preferably while using them productively as well.

What does boil my bunion is people from that age group assuming that it is the matures who are more likely to be "place-fillers" when the opposite is far more likely to be the case ... or that they have more of an entitlement to the places because they happen to be 18.

stainluss wrote: »

Yeah, I hope this is true, if it is then I wouldnt care what motives the matures have, but there is a lot of varying info going around about it. People are saying different things. As I said before im not personally affected, but its just my viewpoint on it.

Most older students apply for matriculation "on grounds of mature years". They are not in the CAO pool in the way you are (though many colleges get them to go through a *separate* stream in the CAO simply for admin purposes) and are not competing with you for places.

A few (usually the ones who are 20-24 say) will matriculate / apply for courses on the basis of the points from their LC a few years back ... not enough to significantly change points for you or your peers.

A very few will go back and repeat their LC ... usually if applying for courses which do not accept students solely on the basis of mature years e.g. medicine. Numbers are very small, and to go that route you can be *damn* sure they are serious about what they want.

By far the biggest reason for heightened competition for places for you lot is that so many of your own *peers* will be seeking a college place this year, rather than opting to work for a few years, and go to college later, or go to college part-time. Or are opting not to go abroad for a year or so, because jobs aren't plentiful there either.

AlwaysRight

randylonghorn wrote: »

Who dictates when people are "meant to" go to college?

Is it in the constitution? ... in some law?

I'm not trying to be sarky, but just because most people in this country have traditionally gone to college immediately after secondary school doesn't mean that pattern is divinely ordained in any way.

While trying not to be snarky, you managed to be just that. Yes it is the social convention, and no people do not always have to abide by it. But somewhat like burping in the mouth of a person you are kissing - doing sfa for you duration of school life and then ceasing to better yourself and then going back to college as a mature student with grants and dole money and a comfy college place, tends to stray away from the norm and enter...well the irritating. It gives people who may have worked less, the sweeter deal. By god do I hate to generalize as I am actually doing now, so I apologize for that. - I suppose I should apologize to those who fit nowhere close to the above, but unfortunately there are a surprising amount that fit it perfectly.

Orlaladuck wrote: »

But how can you define who's an idiot and who's not? At the end of the day most LC subjects are learn off and regurgitate onto paper. I've never seen someone who gets 600 points as smart, they just have a good memory to absorb information. And if you have 6-8 subjects to do and say 'okay i'll limit it down to this' can you blame them? Also college isn't free - the more students who go, the more they still have to pay. And if they don't go, they have a chance of ending up on the dole queue, costing the govt. still - what difference does it make if they're intelligent or not? Some rich kid who does sweet F.A could be pushed through grinds in every subject, get into their course and Still be an idiot likewise a kid could work their ass off and still not get in. The LC doesn't separate the idiots from the genius by any means.

I'll say straight out I am pro continuous assessment and don't deny the LC has its flaws, HOWEVER, I am full against rote learning, limiting it down and basically exploiting the system. So yes I can "blame" them. Should a person take a genuine interest in something, or just give a subject their all, they will understand the entire syllabus and will be able to answer freely any question asked. I have no pity for the predictors that get it wrong and f*ck up an exam - an exam wouldn't go bad on the day for you if you had put in the effort to do everything. And I saw somewhere the "we have lives too" quote. Seems most people are more concerned about the fun and frolics than the education, but yet you still see them aiming for medicine or some ridiculously high responsibility job and you realize the only way they will get there is by being lucky and "banking" on the right poet etc. I'd prefer my doctor to be someone who loved their biology course and enjoyed reading the book and absorbing the info, or took the time to take an interest in the English course etc etc. And there will be responses to this saying that this is the swat type, but its not.

If you are more interested in your "lives" outside of what is necessary to develop then maybe you shouldn't aim for that college place and high profile job because you they are taking places in college and end up being crap at their job. We all know the crappy teacher who wants to be outside doing something else, many of us have came across the barrister or doctor who thought their bank account number was the one on the front of the laser card. You can only look at their work and say they got there by banking on the right choices and exploiting a system which is meant to educate, not put peope in a work place they aren't capable for. If your not a school person, fine. Be something else. But if your not a school person, its rare you'll find a college course that has no academic aspects. I know it'll change no ones mind, everyone will still go to college for the paradise of drink and sex.
Things are really wrong with the perception of what it all should be - the entire system is now riddled with people who have no interest with the system, but only the fun parts.

Let me finish off by saying, that kid who works his ass off, he'll always make it. Anyone with a genuine heart and interest will get on in life.

Hatred

gant0 wrote: »

Don't forget the fact there wasn't a single theorem in HL maths.so lucky as I hadn't studyied any but I'd hate to have spent countless hours learning them off and not even get 20 marks from it.Guess that may have trewn a few people.

That did pissed me off. After learning all the theorems and first principals they give me this wierd proof by induction. Luckily it wasn't hard.

To be honest I was happy to see how easy HL maths was this year. We have a terrible teacher and although I'm good at maths I wasn't doing great. Biology is the only test and the english comparitive that I thought were harder than previous years.

randylonghorn

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It was published in 1992 for a syllabus that was written in 1969.

Oh, jeepers, has it not changed since? 0_o

No wonder people say it's old-fashioned!

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Gill and MacMillan sent general letters to schools last year asking if teachers were interested in writing new textbooks in any subject (that says it all really). I emailed them about ag science out of curiosity and the email I got back basically said 'Sorry, we wouldn't sell enough copies to warrant publication'. That was the general gist of it anyway. So it's easy to improve and change core subject books, they'll sell by the truckload. In minority subjects, the publishers won't make enough money so they'll just keep selling the one they already have, if it's not good enough, tough luck, it's all that's out there so you're going to buy it anyway.

From what I've heard about the existing books, I suspect you could do a cheap and cheerful self-publish job on a text or at least a book of notes, and make a few bob!

challengemaster

randylonghorn wrote: »

Spot on.

Students sometimes forget that the textbooks are based on the syllabus (and that they're not always perfect!), not the syllabus on the textbooks.

While I fully understand the frustration of a student who (accurately) says "It's not even in my textbook", this is not actually the SEC's responsibility.

If it's on the syllabus, it should be in the text.

Well, actually, if students want to they can ask the teacher to order in a few copies of the syllabus for them (i had ones for bio/chem/physics), has everything that can be examined in them. No excuse tbh.

randylonghorn

AlwaysRight wrote: »

While trying not to be snarky, you managed to be just that. Yes it is the social convention, and no people do not always have to abide by it. But somewhat like burping in the mouth of a person you are kissing - doing sfa for you duration of school life and then ceasing to better yourself and then going back to college as a mature student with grants and dole money and a comfy college place, tends to stray away from the norm and enter...well the irritating. It gives people who may have worked less, the sweeter deal. By god do I hate to generalize as I am actually doing now, so I apologize for that. - I suppose I should apologize to those who fit nowhere close to the above, but unfortunately there are a surprising amount that fit it perfectly.

See my post directly above yours!

challengemaster wrote: »

Well, actually, if students want to they can ask the teacher to order in a few copies of the syllabus for them (i had ones for bio/chem/physics), has everything that can be examined in them. No excuse tbh.

Are they not on examinations.ie as well?

challengemaster

randylonghorn wrote: »

Oh, jeepers, has it not changed since? 0_o

No wonder people say it's old-fashioned!

You should have a look at the applied maths books - I don't think the course has changed since it was introduced.

AlwaysRight

randylonghorn wrote: »

See my post directly above yours!

I agree with some of your points.

But while I suppose we actually have no hard evidence in way of statistics etc, much of what can be said is just speculation or observations. Bit like saying "the youth of today" type statements.

It certainly poses a topic for a lengthy debate, albeit an interesting one.

Gaga OhLaLa

johnmcdnl wrote: »

learning stuff off is great isn't it.. then you go to college with your A1 in english to do journalism and soon realise that you can't actually learn an essay off and present it to a newspaper to publish.. uh oh..

I love english.. but simply cannot get all the things i want to write in an essay down on paper in 50 minutes
So learning off the gist of an essay I have previously written is pretty much a necessity.
An article for a newspaper will never be under the same time constraints.

That said, I quite like not being able to predict an exam, isn't that how lifes supposed to be - unpredictable?

randylonghorn

AlwaysRight wrote: »

I agree with some of your points.

But while I suppose we actually have no hard evidence in way of statistics etc, much of what can be said is just speculation or observations. Bit like saying "the youth of today" type statements.

It certainly poses a topic for a lengthy debate, albeit an interesting one.

Indeed, and it has been debated a few times in this forum over the past year.

There is hard evidence, in fact, but a lot of it would be by way of internal reports / memos in colleges etc.

There are also some published studies which show that mature students do better (on average) than 18-19 year olds who sit the same course in the same lecture theatre with the same lecturers. (I have a feeling that Prof. Sheelagh Drudy may have been the author on some of those, but I'm tired, so don't hold me to that!)

AlwaysRight

randylonghorn wrote: »

Indeed, and it has been debated a few times in this forum over the past year.

There is hard evidence, in fact, but a lot of it would be by way of internal reports / memos in colleges etc.

There are also some published studies which show that mature students do better (on average) than 18-19 year olds who sit the same course in the same lecture theatre with the same lecturers. (I have a feeling that Prof. Sheelagh Drudy may have been the author on some of those, but I'm tired, so don't hold me to that!)

In that case I correct myself in saying that I have no hard evidence, as of yet anyway.

I don't like to make broad sweeping comments that tar everyone with the same brush but I do hold the strong opinion that there is far more in college concerned more with their 'lives' than their education. The drink and the craic has become college. People have the potential to do an awful lot better on pure knowledge. Instead they may get the same result but my exploiting the system or using some mechanism whereby they are relieved from having to know their entire course. Of course there are loads of exceptions to my ramblings, i know many people really embrace third level education and become the best they can.

leavingcert

I agree with the SEC, I'm one of those people who have been studying 24/7 for the past 10 months, I studied on Christmas day for gods sake!
I've covered everything, it's not fair that those who decide to pull out their exam papers 3 weeks before the exam with the fresh book smell and price stickers on them find what to study, study it then come out with the same grade.

These exams are supposed to be about knowing your subject, not just winning some points, thats not what college is going to be like next year

rainbowtrout

randylonghorn wrote: »

Oh, jeepers, has it not changed since? 0_o

No wonder people say it's old-fashioned!

From what I've heard about the existing books, I suspect you could do a cheap and cheerful self-publish job on a text or at least a book of notes, and make a few bob!

Nope, it's one of the golden oldies!!!

PM sent!

EuropeanSon

challengemaster wrote: »

You should have a look at the applied maths books - I don't think the course has changed since it was introduced.

Don't knock Applied Maths! I love the old course, I'd hate if they started watering it down!

klose

challengemaster wrote: »

Well, actually, if students want to they can ask the teacher to order in a few copies of the syllabus for them (i had ones for bio/chem/physics), has everything that can be examined in them. No excuse tbh.

I credit you on doing this and wish i done it myself now but people cant be expected to do that, perhaps all teachers should hand out a copy of the syllabus to avoid this.

Anyways i didnt expect this thread to head this direction when i posted it but im glad i have as its made for good reading. I was not one of the 'boland bankers' nor did i rely too heavily on newgrange in art history, i winged an answer on the metamorphic rocks.


I think we can all say the leaving cert was by no means harder and ill admit i was wrong with the title i gave the tread(apolagies)
So the general trend people are coming up with is they have copped on to this hole predicting pepers mullarkey and i for one see it as a welcome change. So what does everyone else feel about the eradication of being able to predict papers? and therefore making a paper annualy speradic..

AlwaysRight

leavingcert wrote: »

I agree with the SEC, I'm one of those people who have been studying 24/7 for the past 10 months, I studied on Christmas day for gods sake!
I've covered everything, it's not fair that those who decide to pull out their exam papers 3 weeks before the exam with the fresh book smell and price stickers on them find what to study, study it then come out with the same grade.

These exams are supposed to be about knowing your subject, not just winning some points, thats not what college is going to be like next year

Fair play!

This is exactly the point i was trying to make, at least it was one of them anyway.

This is the way the leaving cert should be. Well maybe i would have eased off on the study christmas day and the likes but knowing your subject inside out, thats what its supposed to be about.

johnmcdnl

Gaga OhLaLa wrote: »

I love english.. but simply cannot get all the things i want to write in an essay down on paper in 50 minutes
So learning off the gist of an essay I have previously written is pretty much a necessity.
An article for a newspaper will never be under the same time constraints.

That said, I quite like not being able to predict an exam, isn't that how lifes supposed to be - unpredictable?

it's grand when you write your own essay but how many students give out about teachers who won't give them a sample essay to learn off... i had an essay done up myself but when it wouldn't fit in I didn't come out all guns a blazin give out about the system because I was still about to make a half decent essay up on the spot so..

Bob the Builder

If Boards.ie or another user on here set-up a Moodle website aimed at giving out free notes to Leaving Certificate Students with actual valuable notes other than the crap that these publishers sell, how many people would be in favour of it?

Given the large possibility that I will be repeating, I'll happily set-up, maintain and look after a system if some teachers and other experts on here would update it?

dan_d

whippedcream wrote: »

I credit you on doing this and wish i done it myself now but people cant be expected to do that, perhaps all teachers should hand out a copy of the syllabus to avoid this.

Anyways i didnt expect this thread to head this direction when i posted it but im glad i have as its made for good reading. I was not one of the 'boland bankers' nor did i rely too heavily on newgrange in art history, i winged an answer on the metamorphic rocks.


I think we can all say the leaving cert was by no means harder and ill admit i was wrong with the title i gave the tread(apolagies)
So the general trend people are coming up with is they have copped on to this hole predicting pepers mullarkey and i for one see it as a welcome change. So what does everyone else feel about the eradication of being able to predict papers? and therefore making a paper annualy speradic..

Good thing you realise that OP!!!

What you also have to realise is that next year's class is going to do the exact same thing and "predict" what will come up. Until they do the exam and realise that you can't predict anything. By the way, these are the same people who go on to college and coming up to exams go "well, this came up last year and the year before, so won't come up this year, I won't look at it". Lads are worse for it than girls (I did engineering). Once you cover something in a class/lecture you can be examined in it and all the predictions in the world won't change that. There's no point feeling hard done by afterwards either if you get caught out - you took the risk of making the "prediction" and you got burned.Tough.

You can't actually predict the Leaving either. You can stretch and try and combine the patterns and try and guess what might come up but esssentially there is no pattern. Some questions are a given - as in, a question will be on topic X - but how it's phrased or approached is not. You can't sit down and say question y came up for 2 years, didn't for one, came up the next 2 years and then didn't for one, so it'll definitely be on this year. It's not a guarantee.

What amazes me is the amount of time some people waste trying to predict via some crazy method, instead of just studying the friggin stuff! They're right up there with those who appear on boards and say "I haven't done anything and the exam's in 2 weeks. Tell me what to learn so I'll pass". Could you make life any more difficult for yourself??At the end of it all, you're the only one who loses out!

(btw OP "you" does not mean you personally!!!!):D

Gaga OhLaLa

johnmcdnl wrote: »

it's grand when you write your own essay but how many students give out about teachers who won't give them a sample essay to learn off... i had an essay done up myself but when it wouldn't fit in I didn't come out all guns a blazin give out about the system because I was still about to make a half decent essay up on the spot so..

Yeah, I was the same
Really I agree with what your saying..

Seloth

Talk about the Amoeba coming up in the Biology test had.

Getting rid of trends indeed.

randylonghorn

johnmcdnl wrote: »

it's grand when you write your own essay but how many students give out about teachers who won't give them a sample essay to learn off...

And that is exactly the problem right there.

Think about it, the teacher gives the student a sample essay to learn off, the student regurgitates it ... whose work is being marked by the examiner?

Sure the teachers may as well go and sit in the exam hall every year!!

Is it any wonder the SEC are seeing the need to be slightly less predictable.

Bob the Builder

randylonghorn wrote: »

And that is exactly the problem right there.

Think about it, the teacher gives the student a sample essay to learn off, the student regurgitates it ... whose work is being marked by the examiner?

Sure the teachers may as well go and sit in the exam hall every year!!

Is it any wonder the SEC are seeing the need to be slightly less predictable.

It's one thing preparing a student for the exam but when HL Irish students having essays learnt off by heart, then it is not doing any favours for anyone.

tracker-man

Bob the Builder wrote: »

It's one thing preparing a student for the exam but when HL Irish students having essays learnt off by heart, then it is not doing any favours for anyone.

In my school, 20 people from the same irish class wrote the very same scéal, word for word... How they can be graded and not discarded for blatent plagerism I just don't know.

dan_d

johnmcdnl wrote: »

it's grand when you write your own essay but how many students give out about teachers who won't give them a sample essay to learn off... i had an essay done up myself but when it wouldn't fit in I didn't come out all guns a blazin give out about the system because I was still about to make a half decent essay up on the spot so..

Well done to you. Really it says more about the students themselves expecting everything to be handed to them on a plate, than anything else.
Course the teachers should also be teaching them to engage and think, rather than spoon feeding them by giving them the essays to learn in the first place.
And again, you get to college and discover you're not spoon fed anymore, and have to think for yourself...and yet there's no whinging. I wonder why that is?

spurious

tracker-man wrote: »

In my school, 20 people from the same irish class wrote the very same scéal, word for word... How they can be graded and not discarded for blatent plagerism I just don't know.

The examiner will have to report that to their Advising Examiner.

LadyGaga!

I really think the Home Economics paper was unfair. I've been an A student in it since first year yet I still managed to find the paper difficult; it wasn't like any other year or sample paper and some of the questions weren't clear. I'm hoping the marking scheme will be in line with the awkwardness of the paper.

I really think the SEC were trying to **** with us all, probably their way of interpreting the requests to make the papers less of a memory test.

Like, in fairness who cares about Boland not being on the paper; she wasn't guaranteed to come up just like all the other poets; you took a risk and didn't win, get over it, it's part of taking a risk. But by not being clear on what they're looking for in an answer is just a bit of a mess.

ceol18

Seloth wrote: »

Talk about the Amoeba coming up in the Biology test had.

Getting rid of trends indeed.

but it had never come up before?surely that means it was due?