The Leaving Cert Is A Form Of Slavery

Chaotic_Forces

partyatmygaff wrote: »

16 Months is a LOT of time. The courses are not huge and it's all very manageable provided that the person in question wants to do well.


It does indeed weed them out. They end up getting low Bs or Cs at best.

If only it was as simple as learning off reams of facts...

So... let's start with 4th year, shall we? English, Irish and maths all can start here. You take higher level maths, you've already learned 2 out of 5 books, so that's 3 books in 3 years, do-able but highly insane and difficult without grinds or an amazingly good ability at maths.

English at higher level, requires at least 6 A4 pages for both paper 1 and 2. So that's 6 A4 pages 2.5 hours or so. But couple that you need to have eassys memorized essentially makes it a little more tolerable.

I can't say much about Irish as I went to an all-Irish school so I'm not sure how difficult others found it. I found it easy, the creative writing approach but had difficulty remembering certain things like the stories and poems.

Now, let's say we take on 3 other subjects. One is French and (assuming you learned it from first year), you should be able to do well if you know it and have tried to do good. So we have French down as a basic cake-walk.

But here's the kicker, you need two more subjects, what ones? You do history and you have to learn about as much in English, if not more. You do Geography and it's not too bad but difficult. You take a science subject and it's sort of average if you have the nack for it, apart form biology as it's mostly just repeating facts.

So yes, it is do-able easily within 16 months (apart from maths) but... here's the problem, a classroom with 20 kids and the teacher makes sure they're all learning equally and you slow down the rate of learning and eventually, don't know as much as you should and end up having to teach yourself.
So you either learn how to be a mindless drone and remember and repeat or you fail.

Sitec wrote: »

When did I ever say people who don't get 300 points are "undeserving lakwit".??

It shows academically they can retain information. Don't forget when you retain information its learning and building the persons knowledge.

There can't be a system in place that addresses the needs of every student individually.

The leaving cert does prove motivation though.

You just seemed to come across as having a superior sense since you seemed to look down on those that aren't mindless drones.

We can all retain information but nobody should be expected to retain so much information on a variety of subjects in great detail, especially not for the leaving cert. It's a joke and most people just don't realize it. If I was a renaissance man then yes, it would be appropiate but not many people are.

Individual learning system or not, the leaving cert generally lumps everyone together and it upsets the balance. You have kids that don't care about school or a certain subject in with those that are bad at a subject but want to try and those that can do well. So you have 3 types in a class: the kids who show no interest and disrupt the class, the kids who get upset since they can't understand it due to the disruption and feel inferior and then you have those that do understand it but are bored since the class is too slow because of those that disrupt it.

It provides moitvation to become a mindless drone, that's about it.

Spudmonkey wrote: »

For subjects like history etc, there has to be a certain amount of that. You can't change the way that is taught.

Oh no, I know that. Certain things like history, biology and so on are basically just factual subjects. But take English, for example. Now we're "encouraged" to form our own opinions... then told we're wrong and to have a different opinion just to get marks. It says one thing but really, it means just "sit down, shut up and think what we tell you to think".

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Unfortunately kids don't know that they want to grow up to be an administrator or some such. All you can do is give them as good a grounding in everything as possible.

A good grounding, yes. But here's the problem: learning an entire subject isn't a good grounding, it's just a redundant idea.

Grindylow

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Hmmm yes. Good luck in your dumbed down syllabus.

The syllabus isn't dumbed down at all, as far as I know it wasn't even the same structure of a Leaving Cert 20 years ago, it was a completely different exam. I'm sure if you sat in an honours maths class now and attempted both paper 1 and 2 of the exam that you'd have no idea how to do half of the questions. New material has been added to the syllabus, and the old, useless material has been taken away.

Just because you're of the opinion that your exam was much more difficult than it is today doesn't make it true.

Chaotic_Forces

Sitec wrote: »

What do you suggest be done about the leaving cert then?

Destroy the points system completely. Force schools to have smaller classes, actually have useful courses and have it taught in a decent manner, not "learn x, repeat x, good luck" and hopefully make the system for education about learning for the sake of learning rather than repeating facts to get high points.

Chaotic_Forces

Sitec wrote: »

That's all well and good and theory but realistically it can't be done. The price of schooling students would be the same as college.

Not if we don't bother trying to teach those that don't wish to learn. If you don't think you should go to school get a job, don't wreck the chances of others.

Chaotic_Forces

Sitec wrote: »

How can a person get a job without an education?

The leaving cert and college isn't the only means of getting a job. If they don't want to learn then they can stay in an entry level position for their life.

Naikon

Sitec wrote: »

How can a person get a job without an education?

Persistence, skill, and determination. I only did the leaving to get into college. Would not have bothered otherwise, since you can stil get into college without the LC.

Chaotic_Forces

Sitec wrote: »

So people should decide at 15/16 what career they choose for the rest of their life?

What if a students family can't afford to pay for your version of the leaving cert and are exceeding through school? Then people are getting punished for social status.

If it was as simple as you are saying it would have been implemented but unfortunately there's too many varying subjects unaccounted for.

I didn't suggest people should pay at all!

I merely stated that if kids don't want to go to school at 16, then tell them to get a job instead of trying to educate them.

andrew

Get off Boards and get back to studying OP.

kowloon

I had to do the leaving and that's reason enough for everyone else to suffer it from now until the end of time.

Chaotic_Forces

Sitec wrote: »

At 16 they can leave the school!

Students can leave school at 16 already.

Making classes smaller. = more teachers which. = €€€.

Restructuring the current education system. = €€€.

I'm not trying to imply the leaving cert is perfect but to make such drastic changes wont happen. Possibly it should but it will be at the cost of the parent.

If we actually had a proper system to permantly kick certain kids out of school, we wouldn't need more teachers. The number of students that want to learn is a lot less than those that just go there because they're "forced".

Overheal

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

If we actually had a proper system to permantly kick certain kids out of school, we wouldn't need more teachers. The number of students that want to learn is a lot less than those that just go there because they're "forced".

Ah but thats the Parenting component. Kids that feel forced are probably the ones who haven't been raised to view it as a positive experience.

FISMA

Truly, you are wise beyond your years and deserve better than your current situation.

You should immediately drop out of school, get a job, and pay some bills.

You'll soon understand the expression "hindsight is 20/20."

Chaotic_Forces

Overheal wrote: »

Ah but thats the Parenting component. Kids that feel forced are probably the ones who haven't been raised to view it as a positive experience.

But what other choice is there? You either go to school or stay at home nad be a bum. Most kids won't get a full time at 16 and an apprenticeship is very diffiicult to get.

seafood dunleavy

UsernameInUse wrote: »

Wouldn't you agree?

Think about it: We're put through a desperate school system that is found lacking. Then they discriminate against us by stopping us from earning a living because of a bogus points system. Surely, we can come up with a more humane system than this.

For example, we should do away with the Leaving Cert and let the individual colleges set their own standards. If you don't get the points you quite need to do, say medicine for example, you can pay to do it regardless of points.
This is a far better system. Most of us don't even realise what we're interested in doing, nor take it seriously enough until our twenties.

Leaving Cert is a form of slavery....yay or nay?

You should put that much effort into your english essay.

johnmcdnl

UsernameInUse wrote: »

It isn't rewarding the rich kids over the poor ones...

The fact is, education isn't free for your friends. That money came from somewhere - mostly out of poor peoples pockets who probably don't have kids in college themselves. There is no equality in that system. If your friends want to go to college and get on in life, then they shouldn't expect others to pay for them.

if they're children worked harder in school and got better results they could have gone too college too...

if there were fees it's only be the rich people such as yourself that would have ever gotten a chance to go to college because money is no object...

how would the poor people send their children to college anyways if they had to pay for it themselves - that's still inequality..

how do you suggest this inequality is fixed....

I'll admit that the system is flawed and points are a ****e way to choose - perhaps weighting some subjects depending on the degrees could help a bit...

but seriously like - how the **** would letting daddy pay to get you into medicine be a good idea seriously like - just explain that for me...

heliguyheliguy

@op
Really you don't need to look to far, to see the results of education for those who can pay societies, USA, most of Africa and the middle east, china. Is that really where you want to grow up, or your kids to grow up. If so lets hope you don't have something unforeseen happen to you or a family member, that eats up your wealth and then leaves you to watch your bright smart hardworking kids get straight A's in the leaving cert and take jobs at the till in Tesco's or McDonald's because u can't pay for uni.
I'm not making this up I'm talking about pre-80's Ireland.
I guess your right about our education system lacking if your at leaving cert level and need this explained and I mean that not as an attack on you, but on an education system, that does not teach the importance of education based on ability as opposed to circumstance.

BroomBurner

heliguyheliguy wrote: »

I guess your right about our education system lacking if your at leaving cert level and need this explained and I mean that not as an attack on you, but on an education system, that does not teach the importance of education based on ability as opposed to circumstance.

Not necessarily, you can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Maybe the importance of education was explained to the OP, they just weren't listening.

Look, almost all of us here have been through the LC, no doubt cribbed and moaned about it at the time, but that's life. Just get the head down and get on with it.

I don't agree at all with learning sh*t like "life lessons" in school either. The clue is in the title.

Coeurdepirate

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

students need to wait til they are working full time and look back at how easy school was before thinking the leaving is difficult

School is also full time, when students come home they need to spend hours studying and doing homework and you don't get paid for going to school.

yawha

crayolastereo wrote: »

I've done the older HL maths and chemistry questions. They are no more difficult than the ones I do now (excluding project maths, those can potentially be easier or more difficult depending on where your aptitudes lie)

You've gotta be joking. Yes you'll get the odd question that's on par with what they ask these days, but overall, the difficulty level is higher IME.

When you say you've done the "older" HL maths and chemistry questions, how much older do you mean? I'd be talking about pre-1995 questions.

yawha

Captain_Generic wrote: »

In final year computer science myself, and if you can add and subtract, you can be a programmer

A good one, though?

You can scrape through a computer science course easily if you stick it out. You'll come out as a horrible programmer and will find it difficult to get a decent job though.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant-programmers-program.html

4zn76tysfajdxp

johnmcdnl wrote: »

but seriously like - how the **** would letting daddy pay to get you into medicine be a good idea seriously like - just explain that for me...

Rich people are simply better than poor people. Everyone knows that.

Mike 1972

yawha wrote: »

You'll come out as a horrible programmer and end up working for microsoft though.

FYP ?

Niko Deep Underachiever wrote: »

Rich people are simply better than poor people. Everyone knows that.

Voiceover guy off Little Britain is that you ?

yawha

?

Chaotic_Forces

Coeurdepirate wrote: »

School is also full time, when students come home they need to spend hours studying and doing homework and you don't get paid for going to school.

Much more than full time. See my example in the time.
In fifth and sixth year it wouldn't be odd for me to have to spend about 6.5 hours in school and then about 4 or 5 hours at home studying/homework.

yawha

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Much more than full time. See my example in the time.
In fifth and sixth year it wouldn't be odd for me to have to spend about 6.5 hours in school and then about 4 or 5 hours at home studying/homework.

You are spending an excessive amount of time at studying/homework.

4 or 5 hours a night doing homework/studying is not necessary to do well, in fact, it's hugely excessive, and I'd say there's more of a chance you'll completely burn out than do very well.

Chaotic_Forces

yawha wrote: »

You are spending an excessive amount of time at studying/homework.

4 or 5 hours a night doing homework/studying is not necessary to do well, in fact, it's hugely excessive, and I'd say there's more of a chance you'll completely burn out than do very well.

I'll be sure to go back in time and say the same thing I said then and again, I will be told "it's not our fault if aren't capable of doing the work that's required, it's not our fault we have to give you homework".

It was a very common practice to get an essay every day between Irish and English classes, which, if you didn't want to break your hand, would take you more than 30 minutes of writing.

Educational attainment in school is a very complex area and is influence by many things. It is impossible to compare work and school as regards the amount of work involved, to do VERY well in school dose require long hours the full school day plus at lest 3 hours study as well, that is longer that the average working day however in school the holiday are much longer....maybe calling it slavery is a bit ott.

This is not main stream thinking but imo you have either got it or you dont. I was reading a very interesting piece about Paul Abbot the guy who wrote shameless he came from a back ground of being in care... feckless father... absent mother a family of ten children who were being cared for by his pregnant 16 year old sister yet he still went to the university of Manchester and became a well know script writer.

I think the question we should be asking is why some people do so well in school despite their background and not asking why middle class kids do so well.

Chaotic_Forces

mariaalice wrote: »

Educational attainment in school is a very complex area and is influence by many things. It is impossible to compare work and school as regards the amount of work involved, to do VERY well in school dose require long hours the full school day plus at lest 3 hours study as well, that is longer that the average working day however in school the holiday are much longer....maybe calling it slavery is a bit ott.

This is not main stream thinking but imo you have either got it or you dont. I was reading a very interesting piece about Paul Abbot the guy who wrote shameless he came from a back ground of being in care... feckless father... absent mother a family of ten children who were being cared for by his pregnant 16 year old sister yet he still went to the university of Manchester and became a well know script writer.

I think the question we should be asking is why some people do so well in school despite their background and not asking why middle class kids do so well.

It's simple: some kids just have no interest in school and they're bored going to it so they just disrupt the class as much as possible and as such, it tears the entire progress down.

sock puppet

Coeurdepirate wrote: »

School is also full time, when students come home they need to spend hours studying and doing homework and you don't get paid for going to school.

You're in school about 7 months of the year. Hardly full time.

upandcumming

UsernameInUse wrote: »

The poor can save too?!

Besides, college fees come down historically under this system.

LOLOLOLOLOL!