**Higher Level English Paper 2 2012 - Before/After

GarIT

SmurfOxide wrote: »

Ah hear if you scroll up a few posts you will see that it isn't going to affect me loads. But at the end of the day I did what I could do, I have other subjects that I am more focused on. I don't care if people think I, and others, are stupid for risking it a bit. What bothers me is that they are mocking us for it. THIS IS SERIOUS. It has serious results on people. Just stop being so god damn heartless.

Do you know what is serious and also good. The colleges will still offer the exact same amount of places but maybe now a few places will go to people who studied 5 poets, got 10 more points in their Leaving and clearly deserve the places. For every chancer that had their future worsened there was a good student who had their future improved by the same amount. What do you mean by this is serious you might aswell have gone to a bookie and said here is 5 points, you owe me 10 if Plath comes up. Its pure madness to think that people that took a chance got anything less than they deserve.

I heard a teacher on the radio saying that the points on every course above around 300 should now drop by 5 points compared to what it would have been because at least one of the applicants for every course took a risk on Plath or Heaney. I'm struggling to get the course I want, and If I do I'll probably be taking the place from someone that took a chance. They took a chance, that they shouldn't have, they knew what they were doing, but they took the road less traveled by, and that has made all that difference.

Being so hartless eh? You wouldn't be saying that If you took my place in college because you took a risk if I wasn't happy after. If you read the examiners report he says the exam is designed to benifit students who are well prepared. I didn't learn answers. I knew Hamlet, I knew the poems and I could have answered anything that came up right on the spot.

sarahmocks

GarIT wrote: »

Do you know what is serious and also good. The colleges will still offer the exact same amount of places but maybe now a few places will go to people who studied 5 poets, got 10 more points in their Leaving and clearly deserve the places. For every chancer that had their future worsened there was a good student who had their future improved by the same amount. What do you mean by this is serious you might aswell have gone to a bookie and said here is 5 points, you owe me 10 if Plath comes up. Its pure madness to think that people that took a chance got anything less than they deserve.

I heard a teacher on the radio saying that the points on every course above around 300 should now drop by 5 points compared to what it would have been because at least one of the applicants for every course took a risk on Plath or Heaney. I'm struggling to get the course I want, and If I do I'll probably be taking the place from someone that took a chance. They took a chance, that they shouldn't have, they knew what they were doing, but they took the road less traveled by, and that has made all that difference.

Being so hartless eh? You wouldn't be saying that If you took my place in college because you took a risk if I wasn't happy after. If you read the examiners report he says the exam is designed to benifit students who are well prepared. I didn't learn answers. I knew Hamlet, I knew the poems and I could have answered anything that came up right on the spot.

I'm not trying to start arguments and I can see where your coming from about somebody taking your college place, but i don't think laughing at the people who took the chance is fair. we're all under so much stress, i'm taking all honours for nine subjects, and to be honest it's impossible to learn absolutely everything on every course, we have to narrow it down somehow. I learned four poets off back to front; plath, kinsella, boland and Frost, i had also done a few essays in the last few weeks on kinsella, but hadn't put much thought in to him over the last week or two except a quick read yesterday morning, i worked very hard but struggled with the poetry a lot! so i take offence to people calling us chancers, at the end of the day luck plays a big part in it.
Also a friend of mine's dad died around 6 weeks ago, she still went and did her exams, obviously she wasn't able to focus as well as others so she had only learned Heaney and Plath, so there might be reasons why some people didnt get to learn 5 poets.
I'm delighted that you got on well with your english, and i hope you get the course that you want, but maybe give a thought to the people who put the work in and are still very worried about it! at the end of the day we're all in the same position with stress and worry, and a bit of moral support and compassion would go a long way!
please don't take offence to this, i really amn't trying to be mean!

SmurfOxide

GarIT wrote: »

Do you know what is serious and also good. The colleges will still offer the exact same amount of places but maybe now a few places will go to people who studied 5 poets, got 10 more points in their Leaving and clearly deserve the places. For every chancer that had their future worsened there was a good student who had their future improved by the same amount. What do you mean by this is serious you might aswell have gone to a bookie and said here is 5 points, you owe me 10 if Plath comes up. Its pure madness to think that people that took a chance got anything less than they deserve.

I heard a teacher on the radio saying that the points on every course above around 300 should now drop by 5 points compared to what it would have been because at least one of the applicants for every course took a risk on Plath or Heaney. I'm struggling to get the course I want, and If I do I'll probably be taking the place from someone that took a chance. They took a chance, that they shouldn't have, they knew what they were doing, but they took the road less traveled by, and that has made all that difference.

Being so hartless eh? You wouldn't be saying that If you took my place in college because you took a risk if I wasn't happy after. If you read the examiners report he says the exam is designed to benifit students who are well prepared. I didn't learn answers. I knew Hamlet, I knew the poems and I could have answered anything that came up right on the spot.

I feel bad for anyone who didn't get what they want, on any paper. So can you calm down. I don't think anyone should think anyone's struggle in a state exam is funny. That's my problem. I'm glad your exam went well, but imagine if it didn't, you wouldn't want people taking the piss about it. That is all I'm saying.

imelle

i get that people are upset that Plath or Heaney didn't come up but i just don't understand why people make such a big deal out of the poetry all the time! it's only 50 marks the same as the comprehensions. . people don't complain that the question they studied for hamlet didn't come up and that's worth more marks!
anyway if you're worried about your grade just remember that you did sit a paper 1 in english and there has to be a bell curve every year that a certain number of people get As,Bs,Cs etc so the chances are they'll be marked a little easier this year!

queensinead

gavin18 wrote: »

my head is in the oven as we speak

:D:D

GarIT

sarahmocks wrote: »

I'm not trying to start arguments and I can see where your coming from about somebody taking your college place, but i don't think laughing at the people who took the chance is fair. we're all under so much stress, i'm taking all honours for nine subjects, and to be honest it's impossible to learn absolutely everything on every course, we have to narrow it down somehow. I learned four poets off back to front; plath, kinsella, boland and Frost, i had also done a few essays in the last few weeks on kinsella, but hadn't put much thought in to him over the last week or two, i worked very hard but struggled with the poetry a lot! so i take offence to people calling us chancers, at the end of the day luck plays a big part in it.
I'm delighted that you got on well with your english, and i hope you get the course that you want, but maybe give a thought to the people who put the work in and are still very worried about it!
please don't take offence to this, i really amn't trying to be mean!

I know I'm stating the obvious but If you study 5 poets there is no luck invloved. A chancer is someone who takes a chance. Its just like someone calling me ginger, I don't want to hear it but its true. There was no need to learn answers, that doesn't work at all, unless you get the exact question you lernt. What you needed to do, was learn 3 quotes each from 4 poems from 5 poets, that was the minimum. It also helps to learn one poem, so you know it fully and know one personal quote from each poet.

I haven't said anything offensive about anyone. The only reason I posted was because someone thinks they he can look for simpathy because his bad judgement. If anyone is offended it is because of internal guilt not because of what I said, anything I said was just factual. If is impossible to be offended by a fact unless you have internal regret or embarrasment about whatever was said.

Just for clarity, I'm strawberry blonde not ginger.

GarIT

SmurfOxide wrote: »

I feel bad for anyone who didn't get what they want, on any paper. So can you calm down. I don't think anyone should think anyone's struggle in a state exam is funny. That's my problem. I'm glad your exam went well, but imagine if it didn't, you wouldn't want people taking the piss about it. That is all I'm saying.

I never mentioned that I found any humor in people having a hard time because they weren't prepared for the question. I'm just saying you should stop whinging about people's futures when they knew the system like anyone else but took the risk. Nobody has said anything about somebodys exam not going well. People have just made an example of those that thought they could bend the rules to suit themselves and suffered as a result.

partyatmygaff

SmurfOxide wrote: »

But talking to people today, some think they might have lost their course over it. And I mean really smart people at the top of my year that are aiming for the 500 mark.

"Really smart people" shouldn't find it too difficult to do at least five poets. They had two years to prepare which is more than enough time.

queensinead

linguist wrote: »

Well here's the thing. Public concern over 'dumbing down'. The Minister for Education expressing concern that exams have become too predictable. The SEC is not there to give presents. People need to realise that from now on the rules have changed. The signs have been there for a good while.

Above all, remember that if it was hard for you it was equally hard for others. Trust in the marking scheme now. They will get the same distribution of grades as every other year.

All those posters on Boards, all those people writing to the newspapers and ringing Joe Duffy giving out about the Leaving being only a "memory test", and about how "predictable" everything was getting, and putting pressure on Ruairi Quinn to change things,..

Well, you sure messed it up for this year's poor bunch. As if they didn't have enough hassle with increased registration fees and no jobs, and an uncertain future ahead of them.

SmurfOxide

GarIT wrote: »

I never mentioned that I found any humor in people having a hard time because they weren't prepared for the question. I'm just saying you should stop whinging about people's futures when knew the system like anyone else and took the risk. Nobody has said anything about somebodys exam going well. People have just made an example of those that thought they could bend the rules to suit themselves and suffered as a result.

I'm sorry if I read things wrong. But if you look back there are people hoping that Plath won't come up to catch out the chancers and laughing that so many were left screwed. That's my problem. And I am really sorry if I offended you, I just picked it up wrong I guess.

SmurfOxide

partyatmygaff wrote: »

"Really smart people" shouldn't find it too difficult to do at least five poets. They had two years to prepare which is more than enough time.

The english paper is all to do with learning and those two really smart people I'm talking about are doing all honours, which include english, irish maths, french/ german, chemistry, physics, biology and applied maths. Now I think they were trying to lighten their load a little. And no I am not blowing me own trumpet. I'm not a smarty, I don't do all honours, and I was hoping for Plath or Heaney. But there were people aiming for and capable of high marks. And thy did do five poets, just not all in minute detail.

SmurfOxide

GarIT wrote: »

I know I'm stating the obvious but If you study 5 poets there is no luck invloved. A chancer is someone who takes a chance. Its just like someone calling me ginger, I don't want to hear it but its true. There was no need to learn answers, that doesn't work at all, unless you get the exact question you lernt. What you needed to do, was learn 3 quotes each from 4 poems from 5 poets, that was the minimum. It also helps to learn one poem, so you know it fully and know one personal quote from each poet.

I haven't said anything offensive about anyone. The only reason I posted was because someone thinks they he can look for simpathy because his bad judgement. If anyone is offended it is because of internal guilt not because of what I said, anything I said was just factual. If is impossible to be offended by a fact unless you have internal regret or embarrasment about whatever was said.

Just for clarity, I'm strawberry blonde not ginger.

(1) I'm a female.
(2) I am not internally guilty or embarrassed? Why would I share it if I was embarrassed? But CLEARLY I regret not looking over Kinsella.
(3) Why the feck does your hair colour matter?
(4) You have no consideration. Are you actually saying you know everything on every subject you do? I just want people to consider the feelings of those who didn't know their poet..etc.

Oh and i like how the post below says kind of the same thing. Just noticed, but it really backs up my point!

sarahmocks

GarIT wrote: »

I know I'm stating the obvious but If you study 5 poets there is no luck invloved. A chancer is someone who takes a chance. Its just like someone calling me ginger, I don't want to hear it but its true. There was no need to learn answers, that doesn't work at all, unless you get the exact question you lernt. What you needed to do, was learn 3 quotes each from 4 poems from 5 poets, that was the minimum. It also helps to learn one poem, so you know it fully and know one personal quote from each poet.

I haven't said anything offensive about anyone. The only reason I posted was because someone thinks they he can look for simpathy because his bad judgement. If anyone is offended it is because of internal guilt not because of what I said, anything I said was just factual. If is impossible to be offended by a fact unless you have internal regret or embarrasment about whatever was said.

Just for clarity, I'm strawberry blonde not ginger.

sorry but i do think you're being unfair still! i'm pretty sure that you don't know absolutely everything on every course! it's impossible we have to narrow stuff down! yeah of course i have regrets sure thats silly, i regret that i didn't just learn rich or kavanagh or kinsella or larkin! are you telling me that you dont regret just learning rich and studying something else while you were studying your other four!
I did a a question that I am relatively happy with, so it's not just that i'm annoyed because i messed up, i just feel bad for people who struggled, who honestly would like to see somebody failing an exam in their leaving cert especially english seeing as it's compulsory! it's called having a heart!

GarIT

SmurfOxide wrote: »

I'm sorry if I read things wrong. But if you look back there are people hoping that Plath won't come up to catch out the chancers and laughing that so many were left screwed. That's my problem. And I am really sorry if I offended you, I just picked it up wrong I guess.

Nobody has offended me. That is part of the human condition, people will always want to do better than others, it is natural to want to see your competitors fail. I probably didn't see that theres a lot of posts to keep up with but I honestly don't think they were laughing at individuals doing badly, they were laughing at the risk that they took. I am not laughing at you personally but I find it foolish and even laughable to risk something like that. I'm sure you have heard the saying about not putting all your heads in one oven or however it goes.

People normally don't want other people to do badly, they are just happy that they got the better end of the skunk, or stick or whatever.

SmurfOxide

GarIT wrote: »

Nobody has offended me. That is part of the human condition, people will always want to do better than others, it is natural to want to see your competitors fail. I probably didn't see that theres a lot of posts to keep up with but I honestly don't think they were laughing at individuals doing badly, they were laughing at the risk that they took. I am not laughing at you personally but I find it foolish and even laughable to risk something like that. I'm sure you have heard the saying about not putting all your heads in one oven or however it goes.

People normally don't want other people to do badly, they are just happy that they got the better end of the skunk, or stick or whatever.

Still missing the point. Think I may just retire as nobody seems to see how twisted it is too want your competitors to do horrible, or to find ANYTHING humorous about the situation that half the country was faced with yesterday. I guess we are all just not outstanding all rounders like all the commenters here. Thank you for pretty much ignoring everything I have been saying. x

sarahmocks

GarIT wrote: »

Nobody has offended me. That is part of the human condition, people will always want to do better than others, it is natural to want to see your competitors fail. I probably didn't see that theres a lot of posts to keep up with but I honestly don't think they were laughing at individuals doing badly, they were laughing at the risk that they took. I am not laughing at you personally but I find it foolish and even laughable to risk something like that. I'm sure you have heard the saying about not putting all your heads in one oven or however it goes.

People normally don't want other people to do badly, they are just happy that they got the better end of the skunk, or stick or whatever.

And you say that you're not laughing at people doing bad! >:(

GarIT

SmurfOxide wrote: »

(1) I'm a female.
(2) I am not internally guilty or embarrassed? Why would I share it if I was embarrassed? But CLEARLY I regret not looking over Kinsella.
(3) Why the feck does your hair colour matter?
(4) You have no consideration. Are you actually saying you know everything on every subject you do? I just want people to consider the feelings of those who didn't know their poet..etc.

Oh and i like how the post below says kind of the same thing. Just noticed, but it really backs up my point!

For some reason I got the impression you werent, sorry. What I meant was that it wouldn't matter to you if there were no internal feelings about it, if you were ok with the fact you took a chance you wouldn't care what people say. It matters because Sarah said that she didn't like being called a chancer, I was using an example to show that calling someone who didn't study 5 poets a chancer is just stating a fact and not trying to cause offence. What I'm saying is I follow the sylabus to the best of my ability.

AnnaKin

People. Please. Stop.



I said yesterday. I am a 'chancer' only i took my gamble with Larkin and Kinsella. I had several good friends relying on Plath. No. I wouldnt laugh at them. Yes, I was gutted for the people who didnt get her. I had anticipated the worst for myself so i know what it must be like.


But please, its over. Its 8% of a grade. At the end of the day, it wont be a big deal come August. Chances are Irish could go bad. Or anything else coming up. Point is. Focus on what you CAN change. Not some ****ing poets.

/rant over. Sorry.

GarIT

sarahmocks wrote: »

And you say that you're not laughing at people doing bad! >:(

I'm am laughing at the decision not the people. And I just had to do it, its too funny not to.

Nitsuj

I was pretty much devastated when neither of the poets came up, but I kind of dealt with it. At the moment I couldn't care less, but it's a lesson for all of us.

Firstly, I shouldn't have left all my study until the final moments before the exams (hence why I'm not doing great) and secondly, I shouldn't do the bare minimum. It took me about 3 hours to learn one poet. It would have been no harm to have learned another one, but I just have that ****ty lazy attitude towards things. That's gotta change.

GarIT

SmurfOxide wrote: »

Still missing the point. Think I may just retire as nobody seems to see how twisted it is too want your competitors to do horrible, or to find ANYTHING humorous about the situation that half the country was faced with yesterday. I guess we are all just not outstanding all rounders like all the commenters here. Thank you for pretty much ignoring everything I have been saying. x

I don't wish for anyone to do horrible, only for me to do better than them. If is very easy to claim to be offieded by something, I could completely twist what you said and claim to be offended by how you have basically said that doing any worse than me is doing horrible but I wont.

I don't think your getting the idea of the sparation of the act and the person. I find it funny that people would go out just to get drunk. That doesn't mean I wish the people harm. I similarly find it funny that people would go into an exam without spending half an hour sometimes during 2 years learning quotes. That also doesn't mean I wish the people harm.

If there has been someone who wanted everyone else to do bad, I agree and also think that is wrong but there is no harm in laughing at an event that happened. People can choose to either ignore it or decide that they want it to be about them so that they can be hurt by it.

WestIRL

SmurfOxide wrote: »

Still missing the point. Think I may just retire as nobody seems to see how twisted it is too want your competitors to do horrible, or to find ANYTHING humorous about the situation that half the country was faced with yesterday. I guess we are all just not outstanding all rounders like all the commenters here. Thank you for pretty much ignoring everything I have been saying. x

Look can we all just cut the crap.

If you are lazy and relaxed enough about your leaving cert that you only studied Heaney and Plath for the entire poetry section of the course, then you and half the country deserve it. Going off media hype and predictions just to take a shortcut.

Yeah sure, I was disapointed Plath didn't come up, I knew her back to front as I actually like her poetry, that's why I studied her, not because she was tipped to come up. But I still had BACKUPS. You know, IN CASE SHE DIDN'T COME UP HERP DE DERP. And in that case I learned off quotes and styles of FIVE poets so I wouldn't have to worry about things and leave my grade to chance.

If you all cared about your leaving cert so much you wouldn't have been so careless.

EDIT: Oh and yeah, and I do find it hilarious.

Wanchor

WestIRL wrote: »

Look can we all just cut the crap.

If you are lazy and relaxed enough about your leaving cert that you only studied Heaney and Plath for the entire poetry section of the course, then you and half the country deserve it. Going off media hype and predictions just to take a shortcut.

Yeah sure, I was disapointed Plath didn't come up, I knew her back to front as I actually like her poetry, that's why I studied her, not because she was tipped to come up. But I still had BACKUPS. You know, IN CASE SHE DIDN'T COME UP HERP DE DERP. And in that case I learned off quotes and styles of FIVE poets so I wouldn't have to worry about things and leave my grade to chance.

If you all cared about your leaving cert so much you wouldn't have been so careless.

EDIT: Oh and yeah, and I do find it hilarious.

Troll alert. You're being utterly condescending because you had studied more than someone else. Come down off your high horse and be a bit more sympathetic. People make mistakes.

Everyone hates that prick that has a huge grin on his face.

randylonghorn

queensinead wrote: »

All those posters on Boards, all those people writing to the newspapers and ringing Joe Duffy giving out about the Leaving being only a "memory test", and about how "predictable" everything was getting, and putting pressure on Ruairi Quinn to change things,..

Um, as I pointed out yesterday, the SEC has been giving hints for several years that they intended to make the papers less predictable, long before Ruairí Quinn became minister. And teachers have been made aware of that, and surely will have warned their students.

And they should. What's the point of having a syllabus if the exams are so predictable that students only study one narrow part of it, because they know that will come up?

I would have sympathy for anyone who got caught out yesterday, and is feeling upset. I don't like to see anyone upset, and ye are all young and the LC is stressful enough at your age. But at the same time, people did take a chance despite warnings, and it did rebound on them.


Anyway, I think we can take a break from this for a while to cool heads; this is about the fourth time the argument has gone round and round.