Current Junior Cert to be phased out

Powerhouse

chippers wrote: »

Sorry to hear this. Both my subjects will now become options as well. Two subjects I see as extremely important yet deemed to be only important enough to be options. Looks like my employability is shrinking.

How can geography only be an optional subject. Us as humans are destroying the planet we live on and its only seen as a side issue. Are we really better better off reading poems and old Shakespearian plays....And as for Irish it's great for general interest but usefulness in everyday life? Surely Irish should be an optional subject. I just don't get it.

Are we really better of reading poems and Shakespeare than doing Geography? How does one judge that? The arguments for Shakespeare and say Irish are largely cultural. These are the kind of things you either instinctively see value in or else you are someone who could never hear an acceptable argument for them.

But if we go down the road of teaching only that which are of immediate demonstrable 'everyday' value we might instead have genuinely useful and practical skills like nappy-changing, claim-making, dole-queuing and drink-driving as our subjects.

It could be argued that the aspects of Geography you speak of could be taught in a short occasional series of 'save the planet' classes. I teach some History and would argue that the general knowledge it provides should be the part of the basis for producing any kind of civilised citizen. But could I argue its case on the basis of its 'usefulness in everyday life' in the pub, or at the cattle-mart or in the gym or wherever people congregate? Hardly. Does that make it pointless? Hardly either I would argue. I would be wary of slagging off other subjects to be honest.

dory

bdoo wrote: »

Well geography and history are currently optional in my school, both are well subscribed with interested students, if there is such a thing.

I don't think it's helpful generally of we turn this into a debate about what subject issue most important. Remember that they can study ten subjects but a max of 8 will be certified. Read the ncca website.

We were discussing the option of people sitting 8 exams but attending class for 10. Would be a nightmare to have half the class prepping for an exam and the others in their for the craic/because they have to do ten.

Powerhouse

dory wrote: »

We were discussing the option of people sitting 8 exams but attending class for 10. Would be a nightmare to have half the class prepping for an exam and the others in their for the craic/because they have to do ten.

I have come across plenty of classes where this would not any different from the current reality!

fungun

am i correct in thinking the British have just pulled out of this kind of system after the last number of years?

dory

Powerhouse wrote: »

I have come across plenty of classes where this would not any different from the current reality!

How so? I have many in my Irish class who aren't sitting Irish but they just sit quietly and study. They're not part of the class per se.

Blondini

So effectively the JC is becoming the LCA .... Disaster.

dory

Blondini wrote: »

So effectively the JC is becoming the LCA .... Disaster.

Ah it's not. It's just reducing the amount of subjects so the Department don't have to hire/pay as many teachers. Those 'short' courses are for media soundbites. Most schools (that I have contacts in) have said no to them. I'm sure some schools will benefit from them.

So basically it's just gone to 8 subjects.

bdoo

dory wrote: »

Blondini wrote: »

So effectively the JC is becoming the LCA .... Disaster.

Ah it's not. It's just reducing the amount of subjects so the Department don't have to hire/pay as many teachers. Those 'short' courses are for media soundbites. Most schools (that I have contacts in) have said no to them. I'm sure some schools will benefit from them.

So basically it's just gone to 8 subjects.

It's not about hiring less teachers. Kids will still be in school, class size directives will stay in place aslone as teachers support them and unless we all start teaching 30 hours per week students will need teachers.

In addition, schools will need teachers of all subjects if they are going to offer a decent leaving cert curriculum.

I have no doubt that money, and lots of it, will be saved on the administration of the JC, superintendents, examiners etc., but to say that teacher numbers will be cut is not accurate.

rainbowtrout

chippers wrote: »

Sorry to hear this. Both my subjects will now become options as well. Two subjects I see as extremely important yet deemed to be only important enough to be options. Looks like my employability is shrinking.

How can geography only be an optional subject. Us as humans are destroying the planet we live on and its only seen as a side issue. Are we really better better off reading poems and old Shakespearian plays....And as for Irish it's great for general interest but usefulness in everyday life? Surely Irish should be an optional subject. I just don't get it.

Everyone will promote the value and importance of their own subject. You could argue that geography is not important (I'm not saying it's not) and that people manage to get through life perfectly fine without ever leaving their home country or being able to read maps or know anything about the environment.

The history teacher will argue that we need to learn about the past to prevent us making the same mistakes again in the future.

The business teacher will argue that we should have some financial skills and knowledge to at least be able to do a personal budget and understand financial products and services. Actually it's probably one of the subjects which can be applied to real life on a daily basis yet is an option in many schools.

I could go on and on.

Geography won't disappear, because it's a popular subject, schools will have to keep their current teachers in employment and will have to offer subjects that match the staff that they have. Also students will choose subjects that offer a follow on for Leaving Cert and while LC remains as it is, JC subject choice won't change radically.

Lots of people seem to be under the impression that their subject will disappear, when schools will offer a range of subjects, pretty much the same as they are already offering.

I suspect most schools will continue to offer the same subjects for the most part just that there will be slightly less students taking each subject.

rainbowtrout

dory wrote: »

We were discussing the option of people sitting 8 exams but attending class for 10. Would be a nightmare to have half the class prepping for an exam and the others in their for the craic/because they have to do ten.

I wonder is the best way around this to offer a range of subjects in first year in bands and then ask students to choose 8 of them for second year, so students don't end up going the whole way through in a subject they have no intention of doing an exam in? It nips it in the bud fairly early that way.

Powerhouse wrote: »

I have come across plenty of classes where this would not any different from the current reality!

True, but the students, despite their misbehaviour/lack of work etc, do know that they have an exam at the end of it. There is some sort of incentive to get there in the end. If they know they are sitting in a science lab and never sitting an exam in the subject then it's a problem.

rainbowtrout

dory wrote: »

Ah it's not. It's just reducing the amount of subjects so the Department don't have to hire/pay as many teachers. Those 'short' courses are for media soundbites. Most schools (that I have contacts in) have said no to them. I'm sure some schools will benefit from them.

So basically it's just gone to 8 subjects.

I don't recall seeing it anywhere on the NCCA website but I assume CSPE will now be optional? I can't imagine many schools doing it as one of the 8 subjects if students want to keep on what are viewed as valuable subjects for LC.

Compulsory:
English
Irish
Maths
Science (assuming compulsory if standardised testing is coming in for 2016)

Optional:
Foreign languages
History
Geography
Art
Music
Home Ec
Woodwork
Metalwork
Tech Graph
Business


I can't see CSPE being put above all those options in terms of importance, when there is no LC follow on subject.

Powerhouse

dory wrote: »

How so? I have many in my Irish class who aren't sitting Irish but they just sit quietly and study. They're not part of the class per se.

My comment was rather tongue-in-cheek really but I have come across many students who are in school for the 'craic' and have little interest in what's going on and would rarely have textbooks - and they are regular students who are part of the actual class. And I am not thinking of an Irish class either.

Powerhouse

bdoo wrote: »

I have no doubt that money, and lots of it, will be saved on the administration of the JC, superintendents, examiners etc., but to say that teacher numbers will be cut is not accurate.

That's probably a fair point. As rainbowtrout (I think it was anyway) said little will change day to day in schools. They won't change their entire staffs overnight because of this. If they have three Geography teachers then expect to see Geography playing a big part into the future.

The real trick in all of this for the government is that they appear to have got the teachers to correct the Junior Cert for free at the stroke (this being the operative word) of a pen. And all by peddling the fiction that the nation's children are being stymied in their creative and innovative thinking by the examination system.

The same people who are diligent and interested will continue to do well no matter what the examination system. Those who will not do any work whatever the system will probably end up having the teacher doing project work etc. for them while the government announces its delight at the 'improvement' in the results.

maynooth_rules

I can't see CSPE being put above all those options in terms of importance, when there is no LC follow on subject

I personally would love it if Politics became an option for Leaving Cert students. Would make an interesting subject IMO

spurious

Blondini wrote: »

So effectively the JC is becoming the LCA .... Disaster.

Actually if the JC became more like the LCA in terms of externally assessed tasks with interviews, i think that would be a really good thing.
It won't though, because it would cost money.

drvantramp

Foreign languages in primary abolished in last budget,
now optional for JC
though a requirement for many 3rd level i.e. LC dimension

but fret not, the short course in Chinese will solve all our economic ills...


Ruairi, you SPIN me right round baby, right round...

bdoo

Students will probably do a language anyway, and I would suggest that those who don't should take it as a short course.

It is up to schools, we won't be doing Chinese

rainbowtrout

drvantramp wrote: »

Foreign languages in primary abolished in last budget,
now optional for JC
though a requirement for many 3rd level i.e. LC dimension

but fret not, the short course in Chinese will solve all our economic ills...


Ruairi, you SPIN me right round baby, right round...

Foreign languages have always been optional for JC. Most schools make them compulsory and may still choose to do so.

bdoo

rainbowtrout wrote: »

drvantramp wrote: »

Foreign languages in primary abolished in last budget,
now optional for JC
though a requirement for many 3rd level i.e. LC dimension

but fret not, the short course in Chinese will solve all our economic ills...


Ruairi, you SPIN me right round baby, right round...

Foreign languages have always been optional for JC. Most schools make them compulsory and may still choose to do so.

And optional for LC. You don't want to be teaching construction when the line on the timetable is French/French/construction.

rainbowtrout

bdoo wrote: »

And optional for LC. You don't want to be teaching construction when the line on the timetable is French/French/construction.

I do that except it's French/German/Ag Science. Most of my ag class make up the construction class on another line.

chippers

Powerhouse wrote: »

Are we really better of reading poems and Shakespeare than doing Geography? How does one judge that? The arguments for Shakespeare and say Irish are largely cultural. These are the kind of things you either instinctively see value in or else you are someone who could never hear an acceptable argument for them.

But if we go down the road of teaching only that which are of immediate demonstrable 'everyday' value we might instead have genuinely useful and practical skills like nappy-changing, claim-making, dole-queuing and drink-driving as our subjects.

It could be argued that the aspects of Geography you speak of could be taught in a short occasional series of 'save the planet' classes. I teach some History and would argue that the general knowledge it provides should be the part of the basis for producing any kind of civilised citizen. But could I argue its case on the basis of its 'usefulness in everyday life' in the pub, or at the cattle-mart or in the gym or wherever people congregate? Hardly. Does that make it pointless? Hardly either I would argue. I would be wary of slagging off other subjects to be honest.

It's not an issue of slagging off other subjects. My post was over the top. It is more a matter of prioritising what we believe our pupils should be learning. And of course this is opinionated.

So the question of what subjects should be compulsory and what should be optional is totally relevant. I disagree making geography an optional subject. But of course that is my opinion.

I certainly don't see learning Irish as being pointless. Far from it. But I do merit the content learnt in geography to be extremely important - to a level that I don't agree that it should be made optional.

Not to get on my eco-warrior bandwagon but in my opinion the biggest issues facing the world today are covered in the Geography curriculum - global warming / population / resources etc. As education providers to our pupils making the studying of these issues optional is a total failure of the system.

As another poster mentioned, geography is optional in their school but still receives big numbers. I'm glad to hear that even when optional people still believe in the importance of the subject.

dory

Just a point as someone asked about CSPE. The suggestion at a recent inservice was that it would be amalgamated in with SPHE and get the wonderful title, "Me and the World". Can't imagine it would be compulsory, be strange enough to ever think of a Me and the World exam papers. Sounds like it will become like SPHE at the moment, non-exam subject.

And I refute those who say this won't cause teacher numbers to drop. We've already been told that that's exactly what this will do.

drvantramp

What has Teaching Council said on this?
What about being "registered only to teach your qualified subjects" or has that now gone out the window.

rainbowtrout

dory wrote: »

and get the wonderful title, "Me and the World".

And I refute those who say this won't cause teacher numbers to drop. We've already been told that that's exactly what this will do.

Sounds like the follow on to primary school's "My News"

I don't think teacher numbers will drop. The demand for subjects will probably shift though. With a decrease in the number of a subjects a student studies but with the number of class contact hours they must have remaining the same, a student's timetable will not change but the number of classes they have in each subject should increase. This might see a shift towards a greater demand for Irish, English, Maths and Science and possibly a decrease in other subjects from school to school depending on what is offered at a local level.

There will be no radical change in the short to medium term as schools will have to work with the permanent staff they already have and the subjects they are capable of teaching.

As it is we have permanent teachers in home ec, music, art, german, woodwork, metalwork so I can't see any of those subjects being ditched in my school. Continue as normal I reckon.

seavill

And what about the non permanent teachers this will have an effect on those, it may not effect the permanent people. Just becuaes they may not lose positions does not mean it wont cause job losses for part time non CID staff.

As for arguing the importance of Geography is pointless, I could list 10 reasons why Woodwork and Tech graphics are more important than Geography. Every teacher could do this for their subjects.

vamos!

drvantramp wrote: »

What has Teaching Council said on this?
What about being "registered only to teach your qualified subjects" or has that now gone out the window.

The Teaching Council has said "We recognise that there is a problem.We continue to work to uphold standards by assessing new entrants and robbing andpersecuting those who are proactive enough to want to add a subject. We will also ensure that all new entrants are Garda Vetted every 2 years. We will ignore the established teachers, as we are sure they are grand. We will ignore RQ changing the education system, as we are busy streaming talks for International Teacher's Day. Reminder to those who have not paid up yet to cough up 90 quid ASAP please. We are almost out of coloured ink and heavy paper and have a few hundred registered letters to send... Come on, hurry up and pay. Our huge office does not light and heat itself you know!"
.....














*May not be quite true but you know it is what they are thinking!

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

And what about the non permanent teachers this will have an effect on those, it may not effect the permanent people. Just because they may not lose positions does not mean it wont cause job losses for part time non CID staff.

Perhaps. Job losses will come about if a school radically changes the subjects it offers, but the total number of teaching hours in a school should not change. That is determined by the pupil teacher ratio.

So a school could decide to ditch home economics and hire a teacher to deliver the much maligned Chinese course. On the ground it's one less home ec teacher without a job, but it's one employed Chinese teacher. Overall no loss of jobs, but is a shift in subjects.

Leaving Cert will largely dictate what a school offers anyway. First thing parents will want to know will be 'what will my child be able to do as a follow on for LC, and will these subjects get them into college?' If school A decide to offer Cake Decoration and Calligraphy as short courses and the school B down the road offer Business and Geography as full subjects, parents will be sending their kids to school B, to give their child the best chance at the LC as is possible.

As it is we get a couple of students in fifth year most years from schools not so far from us that don't have the numbers to offer Chemistry, Honours Maths, Engineering, Physics for LC. Chemistry would be a big draw for entry to Medicine etc. If colleges maintain their entry requirements as they currently stand, very little will change.

Students will take (by and large): English, Irish, Maths, Science

and will choose a foreign language to satisfy college entry requirements, some schools may still have this as compulsory...

and three others from what remains. History and Geography will possibly see a dip in numbers simply from going from compulsory to optional as they currently are in many schools.

Also considering the erosion of conditions over the last few years and some resistance to the introduction of coursework into all mainstream JC subjects, I can see there being a cohort of teachers who wouldn't be too keen to design a whole short course from scratch, come up with all the teaching materials, design the assessments and mark them if the alternative is teaching a mainstream regular subject in much the way that already exists.

mtoutlemonde

vamos! wrote: »

The Teaching Council has said "We recognise that there is a problem.We continue to work to uphold standards by assessing new entrants and robbing andpersecuting those who are proactive enough to want to add a subject. We will also ensure that all new entrants are Garda Vetted every 2 years. We will ignore the established teachers, as we are sure they are grand. We will ignore RQ changing the education system, as we are busy streaming talks for International Teacher's Day. Reminder to those who have not paid up yet to cough up 90 quid ASAP please. We are almost out of coloured ink and heavy paper and have a few hundred registered letters to send... Come on, hurry up and pay. Our huge office does not light and heat itself you know!"
.....














*May not be quite true but you know it is what they are thinking!

Very good! In a nutshell!! I received my Code of Professional Conduct today - read it from cover to cover! I also received the invoice for my registration that is due in November!! I was over the moon! And I nearly forgot about the email I got to watch the lecture I missed for International Teacher's Day!

rainbowtrout

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

Very good! In a nutshell!! I received my Code of Professional Conduct today - read it from cover to cover! I also received the invoice for my registration that is due in November!! I was over the moon!

Congratulations. Their most efficient service is taking payment and printing membership cards

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

So a school could decide to ditch home economics and hire a teacher to deliver the much maligned Chinese course. On the ground it's one less home ec teacher without a job, but it's one employed Chinese teacher. Overall no loss of jobs, but is a shift in subjects.


.

99% of the time I agree with what you say here but I think you are taking an overly simplistic view of the whole thing.

Me, a woodwork teacher losing my job for a Chinese teacher is still a teacher losing their job. This is a knock on effect of the new course. No one can deny that. In all fairness how many TC registered Chinese teaches is there anyway.

I again don't think you are looking at this from the overall viewpoitn. You are looking at permanent teachers will be fine, and sure if one person goes another will come in so its grand. Its not grand.

If my school offers the same number of subjects but reduces the choices from 11 to 8, obviously this will reduce the numbers in classes and as a result may find some subjects not viable due to insufficient numbers. This effects my job.
The teaching profession is already split into a number of different parts as it is due to what has gone on over the last number of years, now I am getting the impression that sure once all the permanent staff are kept on, does it really matter what part time staff are employed, doesn't effect us.
People teaching 7, 8, 9 years, in schools 3 or 4 years are out the door to introduce Chinese or whatever, but sure someone on the permanent staff can look after it doesn't matter really, is this now another split we are creating, certainly feels like it to me.

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

99% of the time I agree with what you say here but I think you are taking an overly simplistic view of the whole thing.

Me, a woodwork teacher losing my job for a Chinese teacher is still a teacher losing their job. This is a knock on effect of the new course. No one can deny that. In all fairness how many TC registered Chinese teaches is there anyway.

I again don't think you are looking at this from the overall viewpoitn. You are looking at permanent teachers will be fine, and sure if one person goes another will come in so its grand. Its not grand.

If my school offers the same number of subjects but reduces the choices from 11 to 8, obviously this will reduce the numbers in classes and as a result may find some subjects not viable due to insufficient numbers. This effects my job.
The teaching profession is already split into a number of different parts as it is due to what has gone on over the last number of years, now I am getting the impression that sure once all the permanent staff are kept on, does it really matter what part time staff are employed, doesn't effect us.
People teaching 7, 8, 9 years, in schools 3 or 4 years are out the door to introduce Chinese or whatever, but sure someone on the permanent staff can look after it doesn't matter really, is this now another split we are creating, certainly feels like it to me.

I understand where you're coming from, but if a student taking 11 subjects now and only getting their choice subjects 3 class periods a week, only takes 8 subjects they may well have every subject 5 periods a week and perhaps 6 for core subjects. So while less students will take any particular subject, there should be more class contact time for each class group that takes the subject.

Where three first year woodwork classes existed getting 3 class periods a week, it might be now 2 woodwork classes due to a reduction in numbers taking a subject, but each class getting 5 class periods instead.

If you think that I'm taking the 'sure I'm permanent, so I'm grand' point of view, I'm not. I don't honestly see my school or many others taking on new subjects when they have loads of other teachers who are capable of teaching a vast range of subjects.

Short course Chinese: well with no follow on for LC, I'd say it's a non runner. That coupled with the small number of people who would be actually qualified to teach it.

I understand the concern that part timers could lose their jobs in order to bring in new subjects. The vast majority of short courses that have been proposed could be taught by existing teachers. As for the rest, to be honest given the way hours, contracts and CIDs, I'd say principals will be reluctant to hire someone with such an obscure qualification (in an Irish educational context) as Chinese as they will be stuck with them on CID if they keep the subject running for four years and will be forced to keep on the subject even if there is a lack of interest.

I remember a couple of years ago people in the VEC sector getting CIDs for a few hours when they were delivering FETAC modules in Dog Grooming and it was causing headaches for VECs as some PLCs are cyclical in nature and only have a short life expectancy.

These are some of short courses proposed by the NCCA and how I personally see them align to existing subjects


Cultural studies - Languages, CSPE teachers
Sustainable living and resource management - geography/ Construction perhaps
􀂄 Debating/public speaking - English
􀂄 Write-a-book - English
􀂄 Development education ---- This sounds very airy fairy as does Leadership.
􀂄 Leadership
􀂄 Book club - English
􀂄 Making choices - SPHE
􀂄 Personal finance - Business
􀂄 School musical/drama performance - Music/English
􀂄 Coaching in the community - Sport???? P.E
􀂄 Being innovative/ product design - Depends on area Technology/Tech Drawing/Engineering
􀂄 Web design - IT and anyone who normally gets computers
􀂄 Creating an e-portfolio - IT
􀂄 Chinese language and culture :rolleyes:
􀂄 Mathematics for living and work - Maths/Business

I just can't see a school offering 'Book Club' as a subject over a traditional subject. Parents still value traditional subjects and what they will lead to at senior cycle/third level.

20 years ago I had to make the choice between Science and Home Ec at the end of first year. I was interested in home ec simply because I liked the practical side and we had done no practical work at all in science. I'd have liked to continue both, although I had very little interest in the sewing end of things, or gluten free diets etc. Was discussing this with my mother at the time, and her take on it (which was non negotiable) was : 'I'm not sending you to school to learn how to cook and sew, you can do that at home, you'll be doing science and that's the end of it'. Which I did on both counts.


Not knocking Home Ec in anyway but my mother's view, with no one in the family with a third level education, was that she was sending me to school to get an education in subjects that may get me a job and a degree. She viewed home ec as something I could learn at home and therefore I didn't need as a qualification. I can see where she was coming from and I don't think parents are much different now. They want their children doing subjects that will get them into college and get a job.

If I had a teenager coming home to me in first year telling me that they were going to take 'Book Club' for Junior Cert as a short course I'd be telling them pretty sharpish to pick a real subject and i could bring them to the library in their spare time and if they wanted to set up a book club with their friends after school, by all means they could do that.

Not that I don't see the value of being in a book club, I love reading, but I'd be sending my child to school to be exposed to other subjects which would lead them on to other things. I can expose them to books in their spare time, and some of the things listed sound more like hobbies than subjects.

Parent's question: Will Johnny be able to choose subjects suitable for entry to Medicine if he's picked Book Club for JC?
Ans: He'll need Sciences and a foreign language along with the usual compulsories and a perfect leaving cert. He will not need to discuss and appreciate the book club's book of the week.

Result: Johnny picks French and Science for JC so he can do French and Chemistry for LC.

seavill

But again back to my point, yes science and the language is a must for X,Y,Z but if we take English, Irish, Maths as compulsory, Science and a language, that leaves only 3 options between history, geography, woodwork TG, home ec, etc. etc.
Its as simple as this the subjects will not be offered full stop. They will not be sustainable. This will cost jobs. I am not permanent, I am not CID, if the principal has 2 permanent geography teachers to fill up and 10 pick woodwork and 10 pick geography, the geography class will run, Woodwork will be cut. Simple as that.

Yes it will increase contact time in English, Irish Maths and other things selected, but what about those subjects not selected, taking your point, due to parent pressure. Parent might say you are not picking woodwork as Business is more important to you in finding a job. Not enough people to choose the subject, no class, no job for me.

Its not as simple as instead of 2 woodwork classes with 4 periods a week (I have never been in a school that has only 3 periods a week for option subjects), there will instead be 1 class with 5 periods. Straight away that is a drop of 3 periods per week from my timetable, if I am lucky enough to have enough students pick the subject in the first place.

Like what is currently happening in LC, subjects will be lost, jobs will be lost. This is not about replacing things with short courses or increasing from 4 to 5 periods a week so nearly the same contact time, subjects will be lost which means teachers will be lost. As I said I usually agree with you here but I really do think you have completely missed a serious point on this issue.

Pegasusbridge

Doesn't the most recent jc ncca document say that students can take between 8 and 10 subjects and that two short courses can replace one subject. Also cspe is now a short course. If a school took the option to do 9 subjects and 2 short courses then students could do pretty much the same subjects as they do at the moment. I suspect a lot of schools might do more then the minimum requirement of 8 subjects.

spurious

I suspect for many schools, nothing will change at all. It is reform, Irish style.

jlacey

i think it will be an exciting phase for children and teachers, if they let go of fear factor, there are some very practical and interesting ideas coming down track.

Lord TSC

jlacey wrote: »

i think it will be an exciting phase for children and teachers, if they let go of fear factor, there are some very practical and interesting ideas coming down track.

Ruairi, is that you? :P

chippers

seavill wrote: »

As for arguing the importance of Geography is pointless, I could list 10 reasons why Woodwork and Tech graphics are more important than Geography. Every teacher could do this for their subjects.

Pointless?! Are you for real. You don't believe there's merit in arguing what you believe all students should be taught in school? That's the basis of the whole education system.

rainbowtrout

chippers wrote: »

Pointless?! Are you for real. You don't believe there's merit in arguing what you believe all students should be taught in school? That's the basis of the whole education system.

But you would be going in circles. Every teacher thinks their subject is important and should be mandatory and that is the way you feel about geography. Everyone will have a compelling argument but at the end of the day, we can't fit every subject on to the timetable.


There are students who never study geography at second level and clearly the world hasn't collapsed around them, just as there are students who have never studied home economics and still manage to feed themselves. Variety is good too.

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

But you would be going in circles. Every teacher thinks their subject is important and should be mandatory and that is the way you feel about geography. Everyone will have a compelling argument but at the end of the day, we can't fit every subject on to the timetable.


There are students who never study geography at second level and clearly the world hasn't collapsed around them, just as there are students who have never studied home economics and still manage to feed themselves. Variety is good too.

Exactly. I'm not saying arguing the purpose is pointless. Like said above a few times by a few people which you have seemed to miss each time. We could all argue our own subjects are vital and should all be compulsory. The whole topic will go no where only around in circles. That is what is pointless. You are missing the whole point of the thread if you think that is what we should be discussing

chippers

seavill wrote: »

Exactly. I'm not saying arguing the purpose is pointless. Like said above a few times by a few people which you have seemed to miss each time. We could all argue our own subjects are vital and should all be compulsory. The whole topic will go no where only around in circles. That is what is pointless. You are missing the whole point of the thread if you think that is what we should be discussing

You are arguing how the making of subjects optional is going to affect you personally. I am merely arguing how the making of subjects optional is going to affect the pupils. I sort of see it as important.

I appreciate the direction of the thread is going a different way. Let's get back to how it will affect you.

chippers

rainbowtrout wrote: »

But you would be going in circles. Every teacher thinks their subject is important and should be mandatory and that is the way you feel about geography. Everyone will have a compelling argument but at the end of the day, we can't fit every subject on to the timetable.


There are students who never study geography at second level and clearly the world hasn't collapsed around them, just as there are students who have never studied home economics and still manage to feed themselves. Variety is good too.

Fair enough. You're right all teachers would promote their own and variety in education is definitely a good thing! Maybe i'm a bit blinkered when it comes to my own subject!

seavill

chippers wrote: »

You are arguing how the making of subjects optional is going to affect you personally. I am merely arguing how the making of subjects optional is going to affect the pupils. I sort of see it as important.

I appreciate the direction of the thread is going a different way. Let's get back to how it will affect you.

A point was raised and discussed by other people in relation to job losses, I used myself as an example as who am I to discuss anyone elses position.

Grow up in all fairness, it is not about me, as I said I used my position as an example as it made a point which contradicted an opinion that job losses would not happen.

Several people, myself included, pointed out to you that we could all list the benefits of our own subjecs to our pupils and how each of our own subjects could be seen as essential and should be compulsory but this would lead to pages and pages of the same stuff going around in circles and it would go no where. You persisted in posting the same thing a few times.

Now grow up for youself and don't try to make out that I don't care about students or anything like that, as you insinuated above.

chippers

seavill wrote: »

A point was raised and discussed by other people in relation to job losses, I used myself as an example as who am I to discuss anyone elses position.

Grow up in all fairness, it is not about me, as I said I used my position as an example as it made a point which contradicted an opinion that job losses would not happen.

Several people, myself included, pointed out to you that we could all list the benefits of our own subjecs to our pupils and how each of our own subjects could be seen as essential and should be compulsory but this would lead to pages and pages of the same stuff going around in circles and it would go no where. You persisted in posting the same thing a few times.

Now grow up for youself and don't try to make out that I don't care about students or anything like that, as you insinuated above.

I'm fairly grown up Seavill. Thanks though for the advice.

whiteandlight

Less of the personal remarks everyone. The topic is about the current junior cert being phased out in favour of a completely new model. There's plenty of scope for discussion without personal remarks.

I am sceptical but interested in it at the moment if that makes sense. Actually if the final 60% exams were to continue to be graded by the SEC I think Ruairi would have me on board. Personally I feel some continous assessment is good and this puts it on firm footing in all schools.

However I do not like that he has decided to completely remove the independent correction of the exam in favour of autonomous schools. We are a nation of 'back scratchers' and this is going to cause huge problems for parents, teachers and schools alike I do not look forward to trying to explain that Mary did not get an A in her exam because she copied and pasted her project from Wikipedia

Boober Fraggle

Exactly musicmental. At the minute to correct junior cert you have to put any family members doing state exams on your application form, as it would be seen as morally wrong to correct them. Suddenly with this new model we will be expected to correct the exams of our family, friends and neighbours without a second thought! What has changed? The integrity of the exam system.

seavill

Good point about family etc. There are numerous examples of parents teaching their own kids, or I know of a brothers in the same situation.

You may find that the family member correcting the exam will actually be overly harsh on their relation than on other students as to not appear bias.

Wheter or not Mrs. murphy down the road is happy with the grade I gave Johnny doesn't really bother me tbh. I will not explain myself to any parent if I have followed the marking schemes and there is some form of external monitoring but family is a harder issue for the teacher.

Some teachers (construction studies) already correct their own Leaving Cert projects with external monitoring. It's not exactly a big deal. I do not feel under any pressure to give good marks, nor do I give overly harsh marks to someone who has been a pain all year, the problem I have is that I have no idea whether the grades I give each year are correct or completely wrong.

I have never been given any instruction on how to grade the projects, apart from one sheet with the general marks on it. I have no idea am I too harsh or too easy. An external assessor comes in and grades again, if they are +/- 7 marks the assessors grades are given if within the 7 my marks are awarded, but if I teach for the next 20 years without becoming a SEC corrector I have no idea whether the work I haev done for the last 20 years has been correct or not.
In other words every year I correct my projects I could be wasting my time as the assessor could view it completely differently, but we are never told the assessors grades so never know are we doing it correctly or not.
Now as far as I am concerned this is a major flaw in the system.

This situation surely cannot be allowed to happen with the new course

whiteandlight

The problem is I suspect it will be. And it will be all the harder to stand over the grade you have given if you are never fully sure what the guidelines are. It's a bit worrying!

rainbowtrout

In theory continuous assessment of coursework should be carried out fairly and normally would be when it comes to Christmas tests etc but when the end result is awarded by the SEC then it moves the goalposts.

I have to agree with musicmental and booberfraggle on that one. There was a thread here a few weeks back where we discussed the way JC science coursework is currently completed and it was clear that plenty of teachers just get their students to tick all the boxes for the 30 mandatory experiments whether they had completed and written them up or not. I think RealJohn said in that thread that it was rare to see a coursework booklet without the full set ticked so students got full marks yet we all know the reality of under performing students, with poor attendance who don't complete homework etc yet the number of students getting full marks in this section of coursework doesn't reflect that.

I'd like to think that all teachers would grade coursework fairly but if this is the reality of current coursework it would be a concern of mine for 40% assessment done within the school.

The other bugbear I'd have is that many teachers have wildly varying standards when it comes to what is acceptable as an answer. What one teacher thinks is perfectly fine, another may deem as substandard.

Anyone who has ever been at a correcting conference will know this from the arguments that take place over acceptable answers.

whiteandlight

The only way I can see this working correctly is if every teacher was trained in their own individual subjects on how exactly to mark exam papers. At the moment the only way you get this training is if you choose to become a corrector for the SEC. Even with training on an individual basis there will still be a significant amount of discrepancy.

My example, I'm qualified in music and maths. I've corrected for the SEC in maths, am comfortable with acceptable answers and the marking schemes (although the project maths one has me a bit more stumped) but I've only returned to teaching music this year and while I am following marking schemes for music I have never corrected and I find this has me at a disadvantage in correction.

Boober Fraggle

seavill wrote: »

Wheter or not Mrs. murphy down the road is happy with the grade I gave Johnny doesn't really bother me tbh.
Some teachers (construction studies) already correct their own Leaving Cert projects with external monitoring.

Mrs Murphy mightn't bother you so much, but if Johnny enjoys throwing eggs at houses, how would it influence the grade? If you had a son who was 3 years younger than Johnny and begging you to give him a good grade, how would you feel? Or let's say that you know mr Murphy would beat 7 shades out of Johnny for getting a c?

I didn't realise that about construction. If the external assessor looks at them all what's the point?