Points Race 2011

Salty

randylonghorn wrote: »

I didn't see much "bizarre" about them.

And when did they ever promise that they would be completely in line with other years?

In fact, there have been hints for a few years that they wanted to gradually get away from the predictability which seemed to have overtaken certain papers, and the tendency of students to cut back courses to the barest of bare bones as a result. There has also been hints of a move towards questions which encourage students to actually think and apply their knowledge, rather than simply parrot off memorised reams from the books.

I've mentioned those hints in this forum on umpteen occasions.

In fact, we're seeing very little evidence *as yet* of this change in approach: I would expect to see a lot more of it in years to come.

OL maths was a little weird. English paper 1 with the essay titles was odd too, and that biology paper as a whole was weird. I've heard of them wanting to move away from the predictability alright, and I think it was evident that they're at the beginning of this change this year.

I never said that there was some sort of promise to be completely in line with previous years, but the fact that they moved slightly away from what is considered "normal" in some subjects did catch people. Personally, I had my work done, and I have my head screwed on so I've no problem thinking about questions, but for students who rely solely on rote learning, that era is coming to an end.

It's not a bad thing, however. We need to be forced to think more, not just regurgitate information.

randylonghorn

_meehan_ wrote: »

We need to be forced to think more, not just regurgitate information.

A+

DaveMur1

Thinkings overrated, it's much nicer going into an exam knowing your guaranteed an A1 because you've learned the whole book
Haven't seen much either in this year's exams to contradict this, it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker;)

aranciata

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Thinkings overrated, it's much nicer going into an exam knowing your guaranteed an A1 because you've learned the whole book
Haven't seen much either in this year's exams to contradict this, it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker

That's debatable. I'd rather not be a slave tbh.

Salty

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Thinkings overrated, it's much nicer going into an exam knowing your guaranteed an A1 because you've learned the whole book
Haven't seen much either in this year's exams to contradict this, it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker

The thinker might excel more in college than the parrot though...so it's hard to tell really.

DaveMur1

_meehan_ wrote: »

The thinker might excel more in college than the parrot though...so it's hard to tell really.

Good luck to the thinker repeating,;)
Chance's are,if you don't act like a parrot you'll struggle to get your college course.

electrictrad

DaveMur1 wrote: »

it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker;)

Have you seen either Physics or Accounting papers today. . .the parrots are squaking in disgust. . .you had to think on your feet in both exams. . .

DaveMur1

electrictrad wrote: »

Have you seen either Physics or Accounting papers today. . .the parrots are squaking in disgust. . .you had to think on your feet in both exams. . .

I did accounting earlier.
Clubs , Tabs , ratio's, budgeting......... To be honest once you put the time into learning these there very easy.
Admittedly Q1 was a bit strange with the manufacturing, other than that nice paper.
Some of the theory aswell was very basic I thought to be honest.
No idea about physics, I don't do any science related subjects.

Salty

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Good luck to the thinker repeating,;)
Chance's are,if you don't act like a parrot you'll struggle to get your college course.

Not necessarily. You have to strike a balance between the two to succeed beyond the lc. But thinkers fare better in college than parrots.

DaveMur1

_meehan_ wrote: »

Not necessarily. You have to strike a balance between the two to succeed beyond the lc. But thinkers fare better in college than parrots.

Yeah, your probably right for college & life in general it's better to have a mind of your own, rather than being able to say off the top of your head what page a definitions on, but your not there yet & there's a lot of evidence to suggest reproducing streams of notes will get you your grades.

seanh12

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Thinkings overrated, it's much nicer going into an exam knowing your guaranteed an A1 because you've learned the whole book
Haven't seen much either in this year's exams to contradict this, it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker;)

Id sooner be a 350 thinker that has a social life than a 600 point parrot :P

SDTimeout

seanh12 wrote: »

Id sooner be a 350 thinker that has a social life than a 600 point parrot :P

Social Life has nothing to do with how you are able to get 600 points or not. Don't get into tarring people with the same stereotypical brush.

UrbanSea

sparagon wrote: »

If anything I thought most exams were a little harder.

I think you must be off your rocker. Up until this year it was true. I'm repeating this year and any repeat I've talked to all agree that this year's tests are far easier than last year and that's not just talking because we are better prepared.
Far handier papers.

seanh12

SDTimeout wrote: »

Social Life has nothing to do with how you are able to get 600 points or not. Don't get into tarring people with the same stereotypical brush.

Well if your going to do as he suggested and learn off all the textbooks completely the I'm afraid it will impair your social life!

EuropeanSon

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Thinkings overrated, it's much nicer going into an exam knowing your guaranteed an A1 because you've learned the whole book
Haven't seen much either in this year's exams to contradict this, it's much better to be a 600 point parrot, than a 350 thinker;)

It's kind of sad that you are so lacking in confidence that you don't trust yourself to do well by thinking for yourself.

This particular 580 point thinker feels terribly sorry for your obvious self-belief issues.

AdamD

Parrots can only do well in certain subjects anyways

And @ the guy who said history was easier: I really cant see somebody getting an A1 in the subject learning off essays, such a stupid way to go about learning the subject.

Geog ariphic

red_red_wine wrote: »

I agree completely, in fact, as an exam system I'd say that the LC, while flawed, has its merits. Perhaps this applies only to my choice of subjects, but I would say that the person entirely dependent on rote learning would find it very difficult to get a top grade in many of this year's papers.

Are you implying th 'averaging out' of grades each year is a merit of the system? How so? If 50% of the country deserve to fail, they deserve to fail - they should not change things so that a good 30% of those will pass. Granted marking schemes can be 'off' to begin with, but there seems to be a certain unwillingness to deviate from the status quo they have invented, with regards to percentages per grade.

The mass hysteria with the Maths paper demonstrated that the problem lies not with the curricula of the subjects, or the exam itself, but with the quality of teaching. The Maths paper seemed to me pretty fair, nothing there was entirely beyond the scope of our course and for there to have been such a degree of upset about it surely speaks of the fact that either teachers were not teaching concepts properly, or that students were not taking the time to understand it.

Or, that the course is so long and/or borad as it is difficult to communicate all of it in the alloted time frame, even before you go ensuring students grasp the concepts. (I'm thinking maths here)

Little Miss Lost wrote:

Geography and Biology were two examples where you couldn't just have essays/definitions learned, plonked them down and get your A1 as it has been in previous years. You needed to have a broader understanding of the whole course.

Sorry, lost (i'm not picking on you, really!). I did Geography too and i didn't notice anything that required thinking. It was pretty much business as usual, with regards the options we chose at least (we did processes in the human environment, and biomes). I leaned off my answers and could do it all without any hassle.
There might be a case for the Dingle question...maybe.

Digits

Geog ariphic wrote: »

Are you implying th 'averaging out' of grades each year is a merit of the system? How so? If 50% of the country deserve to fail, they deserve to fail - they should not change things so that a good 30% of those will pass. Granted marking schemes can be 'off' to begin with, but there seems to be a certain unwillingness to deviate from the status quo they have invented, with regards to percentages per grade.

Yes in this point I do agree with you that people should be given what they deserve but if they fail half the contry that means there is half the people getting into college, therefore seriously affecting the skilled portion of the working population. In theory your method is perfect but in reality it would be a disaster.

Geog ariphic

Well, not to be aggresively argumentative, but in theory and in practice it breeds a population of kids that care only about being on a place on the 'curve', and not about performing to the best of theri abilities.

One or two years of large failures (and it doens't apply to EVERY subject, so many would still get to college) would'nt really affect the working base that much, but it would shake things up and help bring about a school system that helps students achieve their max potential rather than being okay with laziness that gets them a C, cos 'thats all they needed', even if they only got the C due to adjusted marking.

I sound like an angry/irrational and idealic revolutionary type, but really i'm an evolutionary type - make the going tough, the tough get going, and everyone gets tougher eventually.

LittleMissLost

Geog ariphic wrote: »

Sorry, lost (i'm not picking on you, really!). I did Geography too and i didn't notice anything that required thinking. It was pretty much business as usual, with regards the options we chose at least (we did processes in the human environment, and biomes). I leaned off my answers and could do it all without any hassle.
There might be a case for the Dingle question...maybe.

Lol I actually think you are

Well I get what you mean with regards to geog, so I partly recant my previous statement.

I can only speak from my chosen question.

I just think that for example in Physical, Question 2 human interaction with rocks and the economic impact it has did force you to think a bit. As well with economic benefits of volcanoes? We never prepared either of those.

Regional,
economic impact of EU expansion on Ireland?

well I dunno..

I guess what I'm trying to say is I think they're moving in the direction of "thinking" rather than "regurgitating" but just haven't quite got there yet..

I'm definitely a fan of understanding over learning off by the way!

EuropeanSon

Geog ariphic wrote: »

Well, not to be aggresively argumentative, but in theory and in practice it breeds a population of kids that care only about being on a place on the 'curve', and not about performing to the best of theri abilities.

One or two years of large failures (and it doens't apply to EVERY subject, so many would still get to college) would'nt really affect the working base that much, but it would shake things up and help bring about a school system that helps students achieve their max potential rather than being okay with laziness that gets them a C, cos 'thats all they needed', even if they only got the C due to adjusted marking.

I sound like an angry/irrational and idealic revolutionary type, but really i'm an evolutionary type - make the going tough, the tough get going, and everyone gets tougher eventually.

I don't think anybody goes into exams planning on taking a chance on adjusted marking. It works both ways, after all.

I think marking easy papers tougher and tougher papers easier is a good thing, as it ensures people won't be screwed over by a year with an exceptionally difficult paper. After all, most mainstream subjects have a population of about 5000+ every year, so the chances of their being a significant difference in ability of students from one year to the next is almost zero.

Geog ariphic

LittleMissLost wrote: »

Lol I actually think you are

Well I get what you mean with regards to geog, so I partly recant my previous statement.

I can only speak from my chosen question.

I just think that for example in Physical, Question 2 human interaction with rocks and the economic impact it has did force you to think a bit. As well with economic benefits of volcanoes? We never prepared either of those.

Regional,
economic impact of EU expansion on Ireland?

well I dunno..

I guess what I'm trying to say is I think they're moving in the direction of "thinking" rather than "regurgitating" but just haven't quite got there yet..

I'm definitely a fan of understanding over learning off by the way!

Oh me too definately.
Wellll.... maybe it's just cos we've a young energetic teacher but he had us well prepared for ireland and the EU (economic, migration and expansion), that was off by heart for me..
There's a little bit on the 'benefits of volcatoes' at the end of the chapter in our book, he always tried to have two angles on most things, so basically if you can tie volcanic soil to three types of economic activity (lots in ag., mining for rocks... think of a third? ...tourism! =D) then your sorted.

Human interaction with rocks.....maybe you needed to look back at past papers a bit more. Its been there quite often... you pick mining, quarrying (our class does that), or oil extraction.

LittleMissLost

Geog ariphic wrote: »

Oh me too definately.
Wellll.... maybe it's just cos we've a young energetic teacher but he had us well prepared for ireland and the EU (economic, migration and expansion), that was off by heart for me..
There's a little bit on the 'benefits of volcatoes' at the end of the chapter in our book, he always tried to have two angles on most things, so basically if you can tie volcanic soil to three types of economic activity (lots in ag., mining for rocks... think of a third? ...tourism! =D) then your sorted.

Human interaction with rocks.....maybe you needed to look back at past papers a bit more. Its been there quite often... you pick mining, quarrying (our class does that), or oil extraction.

No, this years question asked for the economic impact of human interaction with rocks. I did geothermal and had to "think" per se, to get the economic impacts..

Oh and we had the ****test excuse of a teacher that has ever walked this earth for geography seriously if I explained how crap she was you probably wouldn't believe me..

red_red_wine

Geog - My iPod doesn't seem to like your multiple-quoted reply very much so I'm not going to quote.*

Firstly, I'm most certainly not implying that a merit of our system is the 'averaging out of grades', you're inferring that! I don't see that as a merit, more of a practical necessity.*

The merits that I see in our system in that there are particular subjects (from my own experience, Physics and Applied Maths being two such subjects) where the 'thinker' is rewarded far more than the rote learner.*

Secondly, whilst theoretically, your 'evolutionary' idea may sound appealing, it is practically unrealistic. The purpose of the LC system (LC system, not education system) is to provide a means of allocating college places. Essentially, students are competing with each other * * **

Your idea is all very well if we're assuming that it is only the students who have sat their exams in a particular year that are competing with each other. However, in our system, a student can defer their college place for a year and apply again the following year through the CAO, using the same LC results. If we mark each year's set of exams in a vacuum, or not taking into account the previous years' results, it will create inequality in the system.*

Maths Paper I this year was no doubt more difficult than Maths Paper I last year. Your argument would see, for example, the average Maths grade in 2011 being a C2 and the average grade in 2010 being a B2. The 2010 'average student' applies through the CAO system in 2011, thus having a 15 point advantage over the 2011 'average student.' These 15 points are not a result of the 2010 student having greater ability, but simply because the 2010 paper was easier.*

EuropeanSon

red_red_wine wrote: »

Maths Paper I this year was no doubt more difficult than Maths Paper I last year. Your argument would see, for example, the average Maths grade in 2011 being a C2 and the average grade in 2010 being a B2. The 2010 'average student' applies through the CAO system in 2011, thus having a 15 point advantage over the 2011 'average student.' These 15 points are not a result of the 2010 student having greater ability, but simply because the 2010 paper was easier.*

Points aside, it leads to twice as many failing and potentially having to repeat entirely.

Geog ariphic

LittleMissLost wrote: »

No, this years question asked for the economic impact of human interaction with rocks. I did geothermal and had to "think" per se, to get the economic impacts..

Oh and we had the ****test excuse of a teacher that has ever walked this earth for geography seriously if I explained how crap she was you probably wouldn't believe me..

Question 2c, page 16 of 32

c. Human Interaction
Explain, with reference to one human interaction with the rock cycle, that you have studied, how humans benefit economically form this interaction.

(bold was in the question, underlining is mine)

I rest my case? :P

Try me, the standard is so erratic in my school too.

This is so far from discussing the points race....xD

LittleMissLost

Geog ariphic wrote: »

Question 2c, page 16 of 32 (bold was in the question, underlining is mine)

I rest my case? :P

Try me, the standard is so erratic in my school too.

This is so far from discussing the points race....xD
[/SIZE][/SIZE]

Ehhhhhhhh what??! Argument aside, I answered with geothermal energy production, and talked about how it impacted the economy, is this wrong?! :eek::(:eek:

SDTimeout

AdamD wrote: »

Parrots can only do well in certain subjects anyways

And @ the guy who said history was easier: I really cant see somebody getting an A1 in the subject learning off essays, such a stupid way to go about learning the subject.

I mentioned History.

It's common place for people to learn off A1 essays in History. That's why there was such an uproar over the paper this year. Unable to think on feet and adapt essays with other details accordingly.

Geog ariphic

LittleMissLost wrote: »

Ehhhhhhhh what??! Argument aside, I answered with geothermal energy production, and talked about how it impacted the economy, is this wrong?! :eek::(:eek:

No no no, they accept virtually any link to the question i find. The rock cycle is not a cycle without geomthermal processes. If this part of the cycle beneits humanity economically, and you've 14 other SRPs, you've 30 marks in the bag. (an don't be worried - i used belgium in place of india in a pre question, it was struck out, still got an A1....xD)

SDTimeout wrote: »

I mentioned History.

It's common place for people to learn off A1 essays in History. That's why there was such an uproar over the paper this year. Unable to think on feet and adapt essays with other details accordingly.

I really don't see why people can't transfer skills from English to other subjects.
A 'History student' and an 'English student' are expected to develope different skill sets, sure - but 98 percent of the country does English so why don't they have these skills in a history test?
(These skills, being thinking on your feet, adjusting what you know to suit the answer, outright taurosh1tting from time to time..etc.)

Salty

DaveMur1 wrote: »

Yeah, your probably right for college & life in general it's better to have a mind of your own, rather than being able to say off the top of your head what page a definitions on, but your not there yet & there's a lot of evidence to suggest reproducing streams of notes will get you your grades.

Rote learning doesn't suit everyone, I can only do so much before I become overwhelmed. I'm more of the thinker type, but I've always been an A1 in everything. I'm not gonna get 600 in August, I mightn't even get 500 due to having bad days and ill-health, but in the long run, thinking and common sense are far better attributes to have. I'll get to my career path eventually, but not solely by relentless rote learning.