Strike On ! Proposed New Junior Cert **See Mod Warning Post #1**

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And why can't all of these projects be corrected anonymously along with the JC papers? LCVP currently has a portfolio which is mainly typed documents but can also include a recorded interview. They are packed off for correction along with the written exams. Why can't JC be done like this? It's working for LCVP, so it' can't be too hard to adapt JC in the same way. The JC Science coursework is currently sent away with the written papers for correction. So it does seem to come back to cost saving by the DES.

Projects can be corrected anonymously, but some forms of CA can't. Presentations or demonstrations, for example. Project work done in teams. Field work.

Inspector Coptoor

And that's all well and good


But this is not Germany

katydid

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Just to be clear, I'm all for continuous assessment, I just don't want to mark ANY of my own students' work, ever

What are you afraid of? Are you not a professional?

katydid

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

And that's all well and good


But this is not Germany

So? Human beings are human beings.

r93kaey5p2izun

katydid wrote: »

What's the problem with it being for state certification? Why are you not prepared to stand over the mark you give? Your colleagues in FE do. FETAC grades are just as important to students as LC grades, if they are needed for third level.

And as already discussed FETAC grades are often not worth the paper they're written on. You've admitted as much yourself. You are confident in your own centre's practices but you know there are lots of centres that are not up to scratch. You know FETAC monitoring is not enough to maintain standards. So why would we want to bring this in for any other state exam?

If you don't understand how schools would benefit from increasing grades (enrollment and jobs being on the line) or how many individual teachers could be pressurised, not just by parents but by some management (their hours and insecure contracts being on the line), then you don't seem to understand the current state of second level education here.

Just about every teacher wants and supports meaningul CA. Why can't there be external assessment? The only reason is money saving.

Inspector Coptoor

katydid wrote: »

What are you afraid of? Are you not a professional?

I'm afraid of nothing, except of course possible drop in standards due to an ill thought out, money saving endeavour, the change in the role of the teacher and of course, the huge increase in workload

There's no need to call my professionalism into question because my opinion
Differs to yours

katydid

Marshall Some Second wrote: »

And as already discussed FETAC grades are often not worth the paper they're written on. You've admitted as much yourself. You are confident in your own centre's practices but you know there are lots of centres that are not up to scratch. You know FETAC monitoring is not enough to maintain standards. So why would we want to bring this in for any other state exam?

If you don't understand how schools would benefit from increasing grades (enrollment and jobs being on the line) or how many individual teachers could be pressurised, not just by parents but by some management (their hours and insecure contracts being on the line), then you don't seem to understand the current state of second level education here.

Just about every teacher wants and supports meaningul CA. Why can't there be external assessment? The only reason is money saving.

I have said that FETAC grades given by private providers, and not properly devised, assessed or moderated, are often not worth the paper they are written on. FETAC grades awarded by a properly funded, properly assessed and moderated system in Dept. of Education schools, operated by dedicated teachers who care for their students and for their professionalism are certainly worth what they state they are.

Of course I understand how schools can benefit from increased enrollment - my point is that, no more than the present system, if the new system is properly operated, there can be, WILL be, no difference between schools.

As for pressure from parents, I do understand it. I taught at second level for twelve years, three of them in the UK, where parents rule supreme. Pressure from hard pressed students desperate to get into third level could be as difficult, if you let it - you see these people every day, and have a relationship with them and want them to do well. But you don't let it, you just make it clear that the marks are not open to discussion, and that's the end of it.

katydid

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I'm afraid of nothing, except of course possible drop in standards due to an ill thought out, money saving endeavour, the change in the role of the teacher and of course, the huge increase in workload

There's no need to call my professionalism into question because my opinion
Differs to yours

But I genuinely don't understand why a teacher, a professional educator, can't trust themselves to be fair, objective and no susceptible to pressure. I'm not calling your professionalism into question, just reminding you that you are a professional.

If it is ill thought out, I agree with you that it will be a disaster, but that is what the teachers should be ensuring. Not that it doesn't happen, but that it happens properly, on the teachers' terms.

evolving_doors

having jumped both sides of the fence on teacher assessment/certification I'm now of the view that it is the thin end of the wedge.

We need to look at the broader intention of those in positions of influence (which is never the minister from what I can see).

1. Teacher assessment/certification. There is an agenda to bring this in. For Education reasons ... maybe, but by the way its being rammed through its obvious it has little to do with 'best practice'. Just talk to any english teacher who never got any clear answers from the 'inservice'. (Compare that to the gradual phasing in of project maths!).

2. It is a fact that this government want all individual school results published.

3. It is a fact that the inspectorate want performance reviews for all teachers and principals.

4. The new assessment director of the NCCA wants to impliment the Scottish system of recording all the assessment that is to take place for the junior cert. (... alluded to in the Travers document as the ASS (i kid you not)).

5. The last piece of the jigsaw is the moving over of the increment system to a performance review by your senior peers at work.... anyone take any notice of the new 'mentoring system' currently being piloted?

No, no not like the UK at all is it? (cough cough cofsted!)

Look at the broader picture first.

Inspector Coptoor

katydid wrote: »

But I genuinely don't understand why a teacher, a professional educator, can't trust themselves to be fair, objective and no susceptible to pressure. I'm not calling your professionalism into question, just reminding you that you are a professional.

If it is ill thought out, I agree with you that it will be a disaster, but that is what the teachers should be ensuring. Not that it doesn't happen, but that it happens properly, on the teachers' terms.

If we can avoid accepting the swallowing of this, thin end of the wedge, bitter pill to swallow, why would we work to ensure it comes in.

It is going to cost the government, through the SEC, to correct the 60% terminal exams, why not correct the 40% CA while they are at it?

I facilitate my junior science students with their projects which are a form of CA, I dont WANT to have to mark them.

I don't know how many other ways I can say it, it's off the table as far as I'm concerned and if this lone buffalo gets through the gap, just watch the stampede of "new directives" that well further casualise and denigrate our "profession"

A real professional stands up for his/her profession and this is an example of just that

katydid

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

If we can avoid accepting the swallowing of this, thin end of the wedge, bitter pill to swallow, why would we work to ensure it comes in.

It is going to cost the government, through the SEC, to correct the 60% terminal exams, why not correct the 40% CA while they are at it?

I facilitate my junior science students with their projects which are a form of CA, I dont WANT to have to mark them.

I don't know how many other ways I can say it, it's iff the table as far as I'm concerned and if this line buffalo through, just watch the stampede of "new directives" that well further casualiae and denigrate our "profession"

A real professional stands up for his/her profession and this is an example of just that

Why would you work to give your students who don't do well in exams a chance at a better grade in their state exams? I find that a strange question, to be honest.

The only real issue here is WHO corrects the assessments, not whether or not CA is a good thing, surely?

I understand that you have reservations, and the present proposals are not good enough, as they don't ensure a proper system or proper moderation. I'm not for a moment suggesting that second level teachers should accept what is on the table now, but they shouldn't rule out the idea at all, just insist on it being done properly. I had reservations when I started doing this, but I have seen how meticulously things are done, with internal and external moderation, and I've seen the professionalism of my colleagues and I genuinely believe that in the right circumstances it can work.

Just saying "it's of the table" and refusing to consider it under any circumstances is just being bullheaded. It's not denigrating our profession (why the inverted commas?) to work a system that is good for students, who are, after all, our primary concern.

2011abc

katydid wrote: »

And why should you think that we should do what they do in the UK? There is huge pressure on schools over there to pass exams because their funding is dependent on results. I know teachers over there who finish projects for their students because their jobs depend on whether or not their students pass.

Our schools are no dependent on exams for funding and the day they are would be a disaster for Irish education.

As I've said all along, with the proper assessment procedures, proper support from the department in the form of external assessment and proper support from management, there is no reason that it should in any way be like the UK system.

How could anybody who has worked more than a wet week in the Irish education system suggest that we DONT copy everything the British do ?

After school /lunchtime subject department meetings , minuted of course 'Heads' of subject departments , teachers ( especially young ones) 'on site' at 8am AND 530pm .Acronyms for EVERYTHING ( Traver's A.S.S !!!!!!!) .League Tables.( International) Demise of 'faith schools' , Best Practice Going Forward etc etc

You can't help but notice that every second 'talking head' rolled out by a government dept or Quango these days is British .Its like our 'rulers' have some kind of post colonial inferiority complex .The dogs on the street knew that our education system was ( is?) the envy of the world (and CERTAINLY the UK )up until very recently .

Sure this carry on is so well known we even mock the fact they adopt practices when the British are giving them up as failures .

You haven't noticed this Katy?

( By the way the British education system seems to be in its death throes as far as I can see , the American system is DEAD .Teachers status and conditions have been downgraded beyond belief .Only children of the rich are served by these changes .(Semi)Privatisation of schools is endemic in UK . )

Ekstar

katydid wrote:

Why would you work to give your students who don't do well in exams a chance at a better grade in their state exams? I find that a strange question, to be honest.

katydid wrote:

The only real issue here is WHO corrects the assessments, not whether or not CA is a good thing, surely?

Speaking as a student in second level, I completely disagree with the new Junior Cert. Yes I do see some benefits, but I feel that none of these outways the problems.

First of all, Not every student is going to agree with the teacher's grade. You dont realise but students constantly complain about how the teacher unfairly marked them because 'They always hated me'. As well as that, there is different types of teachers in schools. In my school, we have a very relaxed, easy marker french teacher who would almost give you marks for your name even if she had to tell you how to spell it. Then theres another French teacher who you is very harsh when correcting. Now if there is two french classes that year, the class with the harsher class will complain the other class was marked far easier, and in turn the other class feel like they didnt deserve that mark, even if they did.

Personally, I have done the state Junior Cert and I liked it. I know everyone says it falls all on one day and its unfair on some people, but its clear that the people who are keeping up with the work, studying throughout the year for every class test, naturally does better in the exam. In my opinion your work throughout the year is reflected in the current junior cert system.

poster2525

I spent 7 years working in the further education sector in Ireland, and I have written/graded/assessed approx 10 modules.

Some of the difficulties I have encountered include:

- work being thrown at me after a deadline and having to accept and grade it
- difficulty in allocating grades when giving students a choice in how they may present an assignment e.g. video v written
- broad open ended assignments are very hard to grade, you're giving a student the mark 3/5 based upon your best judgement and must be prepared to stand over that if necessary
- 'workbooks' can be easy to grade (they tick all the boxes, so to speak), but must be prepared in advance and are easily copied

Other issues:
- absenteeism from students, and then 'hey presto' a piece of finished work
- spoonfeeding/carrying students through a course

katydid

poster2525 wrote: »

I spent 7 years working in the further education sector in Ireland, and I have written/graded/assessed approx 10 modules.

Some of the difficulties I have encountered include:

- work being thrown at me after a deadline and having to accept and grade it
- difficulty in allocating grades when giving students a choice in how they may present an assignment e.g. video v written
- broad open ended assignments are very hard to grade, you're giving a student the mark 3/5 based upon your best judgement and must be prepared to stand over that if necessary
- 'workbooks' can be easy to grade (they tick all the boxes, so to speak), but must be prepared in advance and are easily copied

Other issues:
- absenteeism from students, and then 'hey presto' a piece of finished work
- spoonfeeding/carrying students through a course

There are ways round all those issues.
- Don't accept work late without a medical cert (I know that it can be a problem if someone is absent on a cert and then produces the work)
-don't give them a choice in how to present the work, be clear from the beginning
-Use workbooks in such a way that they are prepared and filled out in class, after a class discussion on the contents, so no copying can be done
- Don't spoonfeed students!

The only one I agree with you on is the assignments that can be broad and open ended. It is sometimes difficult to particularise why you give a certain mark - but you can break the marking scheme down into a more detailed one that you use to show which areas you awarded marks in, and you can also demonstrate by the pattern of your marking of several assignments the style and emphasis of your marking. It's not ideal, but marking isn't always easy.

katydid

Ekstar wrote: »

Speaking as a student in second level, I completely disagree with the new Junior Cert. Yes I do see some benefits, but I feel that none of these outways the problems.

First of all, Not every student is going to agree with the teacher's grade. You dont realise but students constantly complain about how the teacher unfairly marked them because 'They always hated me'. As well as that, there is different types of teachers in schools. In my school, we have a very relaxed, easy marker french teacher who would almost give you marks for your name even if she had to tell you how to spell it. Then theres another French teacher who you is very harsh when correcting. Now if there is two french classes that year, the class with the harsher class will complain the other class was marked far easier, and in turn the other class feel like they didnt deserve that mark, even if they did.

Personally, I have done the state Junior Cert and I liked it. I know everyone says it falls all on one day and its unfair on some people, but its clear that the people who are keeping up with the work, studying throughout the year for every class test, naturally does better in the exam. In my opinion your work throughout the year is reflected in the current junior cert system.

You may think that a teacher grades you hard because they don't like you, but that's rarely the case. If you feel it is, you should complain and ask for an explanation of the marks. That applies right now in the present system.

If a teacher is an "easy marker", that will not be possible in a properly structured and moderated system, because that teacher's marking would be benchmarked with other teachers of the same subject and he or she would have to explain why their marks are so out of line with everyone elses.

Lucky for you that the state exam system suits you, but it's NOT true to say that the people who keep up with the work and study do better in the exam. Some people can study till the cows come home, but go into a panic at the thought of an exam, and their end result doesn't reflect their hard work. Not everyone is the same, you know.

katydid

2011abc wrote: »

How could anybody who has worked more than a wet week in the Irish education system suggest that we DONT copy everything the British do ?

After school /lunchtime subject department meetings , minuted of course 'Heads' of subject departments , teachers ( especially young ones) 'on site' at 8am AND 530pm .Acronyms for EVERYTHING ( Traver's A.S.S !!!!!!!) .League Tables.( International) Demise of 'faith schools' , Best Practice Going Forward etc etc

You can't help but notice that every second 'talking head' rolled out by a government dept or Quango these days is British .Its like our 'rulers' have some kind of post colonial inferiority complex .The dogs on the street knew that our education system was ( is?) the envy of the world (and CERTAINLY the UK )up until very recently .

Sure this carry on is so well known we even mock the fact they adopt practices when the British are giving them up as failures .

You haven't noticed this Katy?

( By the way the British education system seems to be in its death throes as far as I can see , the American system is DEAD .Teachers status and conditions have been downgraded beyond belief .Only children of the rich are served by these changes .(Semi)Privatisation of schools is endemic in UK . )

We haven't copied it at FE level. Why should you think we would copy it at second level?

Sure, we are top heavy with meetings and acronyms, but they are not unique to Britain or their educational system.

acequion

@2011abc, you're wasting your time arguing with katydid. This poster doesn't want to hear our concerns,appears to be in favour of a bureaucratised system,pretends to sympathise, yet ignores our fears about the ever increasing pressure cooker that the job has become, and will always come back with the last word anyway.

For the zillionth time, I want to make it clear that for me this dispute is every bit as much about protecting what is left of our job conditions as defending an education system,which is well functioning,if not perfect.

And by job conditions, let me make it clear that correcting 40% or any % of the JC,with or without all these "marvellous" external supports, only heaps an incredible amount of extra work and pressure on already overworked teachers. FACT! And the idea that we should do this without any extra pay and definitely with an erosion of our holidays, is a complete joke and a total non runner. Even with extra pay,it would be horrible,which is why a large percentage of teachers don't correct state exams.

How,after the enormous erosion of pay and conditions and the demoralised state of the profession,any teacher would even give the whole thing five minutes consideration is beyond me. NO MEANS NO. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

But,cue a certain poster who'll basically tell us to get over ourselves and trot off now and do what we're told! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

poster2525

katydid wrote: »

There are ways round all those issues.
- Don't accept work late without a medical cert (I know that it can be a problem if someone is absent on a cert and then produces the work)
-don't give them a choice in how to present the work, be clear from the beginning
-Use workbooks in such a way that they are prepared and filled out in class, after a class discussion on the contents, so no copying can be done

- I've seen work being accepted the week before the external examiner was due to arriive! Managment can put teachers under pressure to do so. Granted, they'd get the student to jump through a few hoops! I personally would accept work from a student if I felt that they had a strong chance that this would be a terminal point in their education.
- I've worked with very intelligent students who had difficulty putting pen to paper, but were very articulate, and could present their ideas well. I gave a choice of video presentation in these instances. The more you differentiate, the harder life becomes as you have to correct and stand over the work.
- the workbook format can be very helpful in allowing students to work independently, and at their own pace....if you provide 20 pages, as opposed to 1 page at a time it facilitates independent learning and group work....students can approach you as needed

There are a lot of merits in CA...I'm not saying it's all bad. I'm just saying it's not all roses. I personally like to work in this way, but a lot of extra work is currently being put on the table!

katydid

poster2525 wrote: »

- I've seen work being accepted the week before the external examiner was due to arriive! Managment can put teachers under pressure to do so. Granted, they'd get the student to jump through a few hoops! I personally would accept work from a student if I felt that they had a strong chance that this would be a terminal point in their education.
- I've worked with very intelligent students who had difficulty putting pen to paper, but were very articulate, and could present their ideas well. I gave a choice of video presentation in these instances. The more you differentiate, the harder life becomes as you have to correct and stand over the work.
- the workbook format can be very helpful in allowing students to work independently, and at their own pace....if you provide 20 pages, as opposed to 1 page at a time it facilitates independent learning and group work....students can approach you as needed

There are a lot of merits in CA...I'm not saying it's all bad. I'm just saying it's not all roses. I personally like to work in this way, but a lot of extra work is currently being put on the table!

No, management can't put pressure on anyone to accept work after the due date if there is a clear, school wide policy on this matter. Where I work, it is written down in a code of practice we have developed on our internal assessment system and both teachers, students and management know it. If a teacher were to bend the rules, the students who had their assignments in on time would be the first to kick up a stink, and complain to management. If there were a clear policy and you were to break it and accept work from a student, you would be undermining your colleagues and being unfair to the students who took the trouble to get the work in on time. You may think this is pie in the sky, but it is how we operate it, and it works. The students know, and don't even try it on because they know the answer they will get.

I do understand why you might give students an option of methods of presentation, but you are not doing any of the students any favours by that, or yourself, as you are setting yourself up for querying of the results you gave. You have to be able to stand over your results and if there is a difference in assessment methods between students, someone is bound to feel aggrieved. In any case, in the current FETAC system, there is, as far as I know, no leeway to offer different assessment methods to different students. For those who are better at different kinds of assessment, all you can do is incorporate within the overall assessment of the subject opportunities for differing assessment methods, so that all students have an opportunity to shine.

The whole basis of this kind of assessment has to be consistency and fairness. If you are inconsistent - setting a date for an assignment and then bending the rules for certain students, or if you confuse them by offering different assessment methods for the same assignment, the system will not work.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

No, management can't put pressure on anyone to accept work after the due date if there is a clear, school wide policy on this matter. Where I work, it is written down in a code of practice we have developed on our internal assessment system and both teachers, students and management know it. If a teacher were to bend the rules, the students who had their assignments in on time would be the first to kick up a stink, and complain to management. If there were a clear policy and you were to break it and accept work from a student, you would be undermining your colleagues and being unfair to the students who took the trouble to get the work in on time. You may think this is pie in the sky, but it is how we operate it, and it works. The students know, and don't even try it on because they know the answer they will get.

Of course they can and they do.

It's great that it works in your school, but by and large it's not the case. Even the SEC push the boundaries. Two years running when I had JC Science, I recieved phone calls in August from the school, as the SEC had gotten in contact with them saying that (the first year) two students had not ticked off the list of mandatory experiments on their coursework booklet and would lose 10% but if I sent in a letter/fax on school headed paper they would give them the marks. I told them in no uncertain terms would they be getting such a letter as the two students had not done the work. The following year similar happened, except the students in question only did a few of the experiments, so only ticked off say 7/30 experiments. Again I got the call asking me for a letter like the previous year.

1. Another teacher might have signed off knowing the students didn't do the work.
2. It was months past the deadline.
3. There are plenty of principals who will put pressure on teachers to accept late submissions. This is a reality.

katydid wrote: »

I do understand why you might give students an option of methods of presentation, but you are not doing any of the students any favours by that, or yourself, as you are setting yourself up for querying of the results you gave. You have to be able to stand over your results and if there is a difference in assessment methods between students, someone is bound to feel aggrieved. In any case, in the current FETAC system, there is, as far as I know, no leeway to offer different assessment methods to different students. For those who are better at different kinds of assessment, all you can do is incorporate within the overall assessment of the subject opportunities for differing assessment methods, so that all students have an opportunity to shine.

In pretty much every FETAC module I've ever come across it says under the assessment section 'Learners may submit project in a variety of forms, written, video, poster, oral etc' If a tutor was to put that on their assignment brief then the student can submit it in any of those forms. More work for the teacher though. I usually don't give mine an option.

katydid

acequion wrote: »

@2011abc, you're wasting your time arguing with katydid. This poster doesn't want to hear our concerns,appears to be in favour of a bureaucratised system,pretends to sympathise, yet ignores our fears about the ever increasing pressure cooker that the job has become, and will always come back with the last word anyway.

For the zillionth time, I want to make it clear that for me this dispute is every bit as much about protecting what is left of our job conditions as defending an education system,which is well functioning,if not perfect.

And by job conditions, let me make it clear that teachers correcting 40% or any % of the JC,with or without all these "marvellous" external supports, only heaps an incredible amount of extra work and pressure on already overworked teachers. FACT! And the idea that we should do this without any extra pay and definitely with an erosion of our holidays, is a complete joke and a total non runner. Even with extra pay,it would be horrible,which is why a large percentage of teachers don't correct state exams.

How,after the enormous erosion of pay and conditions and the demoralised state of the profession,any teacher would even give the whole thing five minutes consideration is beyond me. NO MEANS NO. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

But,cue a certain poster who'll basically tell us to get over ourselves and trot off now and do what we're told! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I am certainly not ignoring your fears; I have said repeatedly that this system has to be operated properly or not at all. It has to be properly monitored and it has to be open and transparent, and yes, it should be paid. Nobody should do extra work for nothing, and it's to the second level teachers' credit that they haven't even made this an issue.

My point is that instead of fighting it tooth and nail, teachers should be insisting that it goes ahead on their terms. By resisting it, they just look like they don't want change. Yet, they will admit that CA is important for those for whom exam stress is an issue, and for others such as practical learners who find it hard to reproduce what they know in an exam setting. This is a chance for teachers to look at how it works elsewhere - in this country, amongst their own colleagues - and to insist that the practices that govern other state certification such as FETAC/QQA be adopted at second level.

Continuous assessment works and it's great for many students. It can be administered fairly and objectively, and if it is set up right, and guidelines are adhered to, pressure from students or their parents is not an issue. Instead of rejecting it out of hand, this is the time to make it work for the student - and the student is at the centre of this - and to make it work in a way that will satisfy everyone.

The present proposals are not the answer, but they are a starting point.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

I am certainly not ignoring your fears; I have said repeatedly that this system has to be operated properly or not at all. It has to be properly monitored and it has to be open and transparent, and yes, it should be paid. Nobody should do extra work for nothing, and it's to the second level teachers' credit that they haven't even made this an issue.

My point is that instead of fighting it tooth and nail, teachers should be insisting that it goes ahead on their terms. By resisting it, they just look like they don't want change. Yet, they will admit that CA is important for those for whom exam stress is an issue, and for others such as practical learners who find it hard to reproduce what they know in an exam setting. This is a chance for teachers to look at how it works elsewhere - in this country, amongst their own colleagues - and to insist that the practices that govern other state certification such as FETAC/QQA be adopted at second level.

Continuous assessment works and it's great for many students. It can be administered fairly and objectively, and if it is set up right, and guidelines are adhered to, pressure from students or their parents is not an issue. Instead of rejecting it out of hand, this is the time to make it work for the student - and the student is at the centre of this - and to make it work in a way that will satisfy everyone.

The present proposals are not the answer, but they are a starting point.

katydid, nobody here is saying No to continuous assessment. They are saying No to assessing their own students.

One solution you have put forward is for teachers to be paid for it. Well if that is a solution and someone has to be paid for it, why can't the projects be sent away for correction along with the written papers and be assessed anonymously? It wouldn't cost anything more.

The only reason the government haven't put this forward as a proposal is because this system is being brought in as a cost saving measure. They don't care about upholding standards.

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Of course they can and they do.

It's great that it works in your school, but by and large it's not the case. Even the SEC push the boundaries. Two years running when I had JC Science, I recieved phone calls in August from the school, as the SEC had gotten in contact with them saying that (the first year) two students had not ticked off the list of mandatory experiments on their coursework booklet and would lose 10% but if I sent in a letter/fax on school headed paper they would give them the marks. I told them in no uncertain terms would they be getting such a letter as the two students had not done the work. The following year similar happened, except the students in question only did a few of the experiments, so only ticked off say 7/30 experiments. Again I got the call asking me for a letter like the previous year.

1. Another teacher might have signed off knowing the students didn't do the work.
2. It was months past the deadline.
3. There are plenty of principals who will put pressure on teachers to accept late submissions. This is a reality.




In pretty much every FETAC module I've ever come across it says under the assessment section 'Learners may submit project in a variety of forms, written, video, poster, oral etc' If a tutor was to put that on their assignment brief then the student can submit it in any of those forms. More work for the teacher though. I usually don't give mine an option.

It can work the same way in every school if common guidelines are set down and adhered to by everyone.

If you get phone calls from management, you simply say that it is not your concern. If your work had been moderated, it would be clear that the work submission matched the booklet, it has nothing to do with you. As I said, if the procedures are above board and transparent, and the work is both internally and externally verified, you won't find teachers trying to beat the system. They can't. If the work isn't there, it isn't there.

Certainly, some FETAC modules allow for flexibility, but it's up to you, the teacher, to decide what format the assessment takes, and it has to be the same for all students. You can't have one student doing it on video and another on paper, that would be unfair on all students, and impossible for you to mark objectively. There is of course room for difference, for example, someone could keep a written work experience diary and a classmate could keep a video one, but the bottom line is that what you would be marking in both cases is how the student analysed the experience, and you would have a clear set of markers as to what points they made, and base your marks on that. And of course it would be up to you to say to the students that you wanted all diaries to be in written form. Flexibility doesn't mean a free for all.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

It can work the same way in every school if common guidelines are set down and adhered to by everyone.

If you get phone calls from management, you simply say that it is not your concern. If your work had been moderated, it would be clear that the work submission matched the booklet, it has nothing to do with you. As I said, if the procedures are above board and transparent, and the work is both internally and externally verified, you won't find teachers trying to beat the system. They can't. If the work isn't there, it isn't there.

Sorry now katydid, but that's incredibly unprofessional. If students have done work in my third year class and I get a call asking to check that then it needs to be checked. There are no moderation procedures in place for JC coursework, not in my school or any other school I'm familiar with.

As for internal and external verification, don't make me laugh. Teachers barely have enough time for everything else going on in the school day let alone meetings on verification. And external verification only exists in subjects where there is an external monitor.

katydid wrote: »

.

Certainly, some FETAC modules allow for flexibility, but it's up to you, the teacher, to decide what format the assessment takes, and it has to be the same for all students. You can't have one student doing it on video and another on paper, that would be unfair on all students, and impossible for you to mark objectively. There is of course room for difference, for example, someone could keep a written work experience diary and a classmate could keep a video one, but the bottom line is that what you would be marking in both cases is how the student analysed the experience, and you would have a clear set of markers as to what points they made, and base your marks on that. And of course it would be up to you to say to the students that you wanted all diaries to be in written form. Flexibility doesn't mean a free for all.

Don't you think you are contradicting yourself here?? How can you say that all assessment formats need to be the same and in the next sentence say that it's perfectly acceptable for a written work experience diary and video format??? If it can work for a work experience diary, then it can work for plenty of other assignments, where the module descriptor allows for it.

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Sorry now katydid, but that's incredibly unprofessional. If students have done work in my third year class and I get a call asking to check that then it needs to be checked. There are no moderation procedures in place for JC coursework, not in my school or any other school I'm familiar with.

As for internal and external verification, don't make me laugh. Teachers barely have enough time for everything else going on in the school day let alone meetings on verification. And external verification only exists in subjects where there is an external monitor.




Don't you think you are contradicting yourself here?? How can you say that all assessment formats need to be the same and in the next sentence say that it's perfectly acceptable for a written work experience diary and video format??? If it can work for a work experience diary, then it can work for plenty of other assignments, where the module descriptor allows for it.

My point is that you have to have external moderation to make this system work. Without it, you are open to suspicion of fixing marks and so on. Whether external or internal, moderation doesn't involve checking every single piece of work of every student, it means random checking. Internal moderation doesn't have to be onerous, you just agree with another teacher to swap portfolios from, say, three students in your class and you each check that there are no errors or anything overlooked. It's just a quick check from someone who knows the agreed procedures, not an examination of your standard of marking. An external moderator, on the other hand, can take more time, and look more closely, and can call your marks into question if they feel you have been too hard, or too lenient. Something I always remind my students, so they know I don't have the final say.

There is no moderation at present in JC. Under the new, proposed system, there should be, and teachers should insist on it before agreeing to operate the system. It protects them professionally and takes off the pressure of students or parents seeing them as the final arbiter.

But even under the system you are operating now, it is scandalous that someone would ring you up in the holidays and ask you to put your name to something that was clearly not the case. It was questioning your professionalism to suggest that you had not completed your side of the paperwork in the first place. I was rung once during the summer, because a student and her mother were thinking of querying a mark I had given. My principal apologised profusely for ringing me, and said she was just looking for a bit of advice from me as to whether or not it was worth the student's time querying the mark. I was able to say that as far as I was concerned, the student hadn't done the work, it would be obvious in the portfolio, and that I was more than happy for her to query it, although I wouldn't think it would be changed.

I'm not contradicting myself at all in regard to different method of assessments. I said that SOMETIMES it is possible, for instance in the example I quoted, where the method of submission makes no difference to the content. In a work experience diary, you mark on the basis of certain criteria the student has addressed; whether they addressed them orally or in writing makes no material difference. In other situations, it would not work, depending on what the purpose of the assessment was. It would be up to the assessor, i.e. the teacher, to decide whether or not an assignment was suitable for different forms of presentation, or indeed whether he or she was prepared to mark different forms of presentation, given difficulties of time and, indeed, of access to technology. I don't give my students an option of presenting their diaries in video format, because I don't have the time to faff around with downloading and storing and reproducing data files.

r93kaey5p2izun

Our FETAC assessment guidelines are set at ETB level and unfortunately they are insistent (despite much representation from actual teachers) that work must be accepted right up until the external assessor comes. It is a huge pain in the ass and makes a mockery of the students who bothered to get the work done on time. The modules I teach are also explicit that for each component (skills demo, assignment etc) that a specified list of presentation modes must be accepted.

Personally I have found the external assessment process to be very poor. There has *never* been an extern in my centre who is capable of assessing my subject in any meaningful way. At best they are a specialist in the overall field of the major award (but this seems to only be required ever couple of years, so they may know nothing about the area at all) but generally they haven't studied my subject area in much greater depth than the level they are assessing at. I have spoken to these externs and they freely admit they're just stamping pages and checking the evidence fulfils the basic criteria, they don't really know a whole lot about what they're supposed to be verifying. Maybe if you are teaching a module like Communcations or Work Experience it might not be an issue, but it is a major problem that I have seen in a number of centres now for more niche modules. Really, FETAC systems are poor. I just can't accept JC standards dropping so low.

I want meaningful CA (not bullsh!t projects on "a science job") with external assessment. I have a lot of experience of assessing my FETAC students. I see absolutely no benefit above that available to my second level students whose work I correct and give feedback on already.

katydid

Marshall Some Second wrote: »

Our FETAC assessment guidelines are set at ETB level and unfortunately they are insistent (despite much representation from actual teachers) that work must be accepted right up until the external assessor comes. It is a huge pain in the ass and makes a mockery of the students who bothered to get the work done on time. The modules I teach are also explicit that for each component (skills demo, assignment etc) that a specified list of presentation modes must be accepted.

Personally I have found the external assessment process to be very poor. There has *never* been an extern in my centre who is capable of assessing my subject in any meaningful way. At best they are a specialist in the overall field of the major award (but this seems to only be required ever couple of years, so they may know nothing about the area at all) but generally they haven't studied my subject area in much greater depth than the level they are assessing at. I have spoken to these externs and they freely admit they're just stamping pages and checking the evidence fulfils the basic criteria, they don't really know a whole lot about what they're supposed to be verifying. Really, FETAC systems are poor. I just can't accept JC standards dropping so low.

I want meaningful CA (not bullsh!t projects on "a science job") with external assessment. I have a lot of experience of assessing my FETAC students. I see absolutely no benefit above that available to my second level students whose work I correct and give feedback on already.

That is unfortunate that guidelines are set at ETB level. We set our own within our own college; we used to accept assignments up to a week late with a sick cert, now we don't. On the date, or not at all.

It is a shame that there can't be unanimity within the FETAC system, and maybe that's one thing the second level teachers can push for. It makes a mockery of the whole thing if deadlines aren't adhered to and very unfair on the students who submit on time.

I have never seen any module specification where it says that within one assignment, different methods MUST be accepted from the same class group. That would be a recipe for disaster in some cases.

External assessors are not always experts in your subject area, but they have the marking schemes and the evidence in front of them, and have to have some idea of what they are looking at. If there are discrepancies, they would normally come to light.

No system is perfect, but overall, the FETAC system can work and does work. That it is not operated properly in some centres doesn't take away from the fact that many FE centres have put a great deal of effort into drawing up and operating proper systems that would pass the scrutiny of any QA survey. This is what we have to learn from; not all that nonsense about copying the British system. We have a working system here, in our own educational system, and what we need to do is develop it, at all levels.

poster2525

katydid wrote: »

That it is not operated properly in some centres doesn't take away from the fact that many FE centres have put a great deal of effort into drawing up and operating proper systems that would pass the scrutiny of any QA survey.

I agree Kathy

- it is not operated properly in some centres
- a great deal of effort into drawing up and operating proper systems

That's why I favour external marking

katydid

poster2525 wrote: »

I agree Kathy

- it is not operated properly in some centres
- a great deal of effort into drawing up and operating proper systems

That's why I favour external marking

So instead of fixing the system and putting a bit of work into getting it right, you'd rather reject it out of hand.

acequion

katydid wrote: »

I am certainly not ignoring your fears; I have said repeatedly that this system has to be operated properly or not at all. It has to be properly monitored and it has to be open and transparent, and yes, it should be paid. Nobody should do extra work for nothing, and it's to the second level teachers' credit that they haven't even made this an issue.

My point is that instead of fighting it tooth and nail, teachers should be insisting that it goes ahead on their terms. By resisting it, they just look like they don't want change. Yet, they will admit that CA is important for those for whom exam stress is an issue, and for others such as practical learners who find it hard to reproduce what they know in an exam setting. This is a chance for teachers to look at how it works elsewhere - in this country, amongst their own colleagues - and to insist that the practices that govern other state certification such as FETAC/QQA be adopted at second level.

Continuous assessment works and it's great for many students. It can be administered fairly and objectively, and if it is set up right, and guidelines are adhered to, pressure from students or their parents is not an issue. Instead of rejecting it out of hand, this is the time to make it work for the student - and the student is at the centre of this - and to make it work in a way that will satisfy everyone.

The present proposals are not the answer, but they are a starting point.

You are like a propaganda machine! In fact you're uncannily like our employers! I reckon you don't read beyond the first line of a post before bulldozing in with your own view which you will impose regardless. Just look at how you've hogged the last few pages of this thread!

The fact is that I don't agree with you and I resent your dogged imposition of your viewpoint at a time when my profession is under constant attack. No doubt you'll be back hogging page after page with your own entrenched views. Off you go! For those of us who are very tired of you,it looks like time for the "ignore button".

ustazjoseph

"The whole basis of this kind of assessment has to be consistency and fairness. If you are inconsistent - setting a date for an assignment and then bending the rules for certain students, or if you confuse them by offering different assessment methods for the same assignment, the system will not work."

of course your right but.... there is not as yet a country wide fair consistent system, FETAC 5 from a very well run training centre ( old FAS) v centralised , is not guaranteed to be the same as fetac 5 same subject in a small adult ed centre. There s lots of emphasis on QA and on having checklists and tons of paperwork but little enough about the actual quality of teaching and learning. i accept some centres might be excellent many are not.

katydid

ustazjoseph wrote: »

"The whole basis of this kind of assessment has to be consistency and fairness. If you are inconsistent - setting a date for an assignment and then bending the rules for certain students, or if you confuse them by offering different assessment methods for the same assignment, the system will not work."

of course your right but.... there is not as yet a country wide fair consistent system, FETAC 5 from a very well run training centre ( old FAS) v centralised , is not guaranteed to be the same as fetac 5 same subject in a small adult ed centre. There s lots of emphasis on QA and on having checklists and tons of paperwork but little enough about the actual quality of teaching and learning. i accept some centres might be excellent many are not.

Agreed. The point is that the system CAN work if operated properly.

katydid

acequion wrote: »

You are like a propaganda machine! In fact you're uncannily like our employers! I reckon you don't read beyond the first line of a post before bulldozing in with your own view which you will impose regardless. Just look at how you've hogged the last few pages of this thread!

The fact is that I don't agree with you and I resent your dogged imposition of your viewpoint at a time when my profession is under constant attack. No doubt you'll be back hogging page after page with your own entrenched views. Off you go! For those of us who are very tired of you,it looks like time for the "ignore button".

I am basing what I say on my experience. You can bury your head in the sand all you want and put me on ignore, but it doesn't change the fact that my experience is valid.

You are free to disagree with me, as I disagree with you, but there's no need to carry on like a five year old.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

T

External assessors are not always experts in your subject area, but they have the marking schemes and the evidence in front of them, and have to have some idea of what they are looking at. If there are discrepancies, they would normally come to light.

No they don't, you are supposed to get in an extern from a different specialism every year, so each one gets scrutinised in turn. What that means for my centre in the main is that sometimes we have a sports person in and sometimes a business person in as that is where most of our modules and certificates are based. However until recently I was teaching a programming module. Programming is specialist and with the best will in the world, even with a detailed marking scheme, a person who can't program won't have a bull's notion what they are looking at when they are presented with several pages of code in a programming project. They have no idea what kind of standard it is.

Our extern told me the same. She was thorough in the modules she was familiar with/taught herself and queried a few things with the tutors which is a good thing, but told me she knew nothing about programming and just stamped them and signed off.

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No they don't, you are supposed to get in an extern from a different specialism every year, so each one gets scrutinised in turn. What that means for my centre in the main is that sometimes we have a sports person in and sometimes a business person in as that is where most of our modules and certificates are based. However until recently I was teaching a programming module. Programming is specialist and with the best will in the world, even with a detailed marking scheme, a person who can't program won't have a bull's notion what they are looking at when they are presented with several pages of code in a programming project. They have no idea what kind of standard it is.

Our extern told me the same. She was thorough in the modules she was familiar with/taught herself and queried a few things with the tutors which is a good thing, but told me she knew nothing about programming and just stamped them and signed off.

You are supposed to get as many externs as possible; the problem is sourcing them. If your centre operates a policy of having a different kind of extern every year, that must be its own policy. It shows the need for a coordinated system.

man_no_plan

Not forgetting that in most centres plc students are off for work xperience and wind up early befor teh summer allowing TIME for all the marking and moderation.

Apeals are to the school!!!! Who re marks them? Only one teacher of Rurais favourite subject mandarin Chinese, appeal is lodged - who looks at it? Same teacher? External teacher?

Katydid I appreciate where you are coming from and agree that it could work in theory oaf there was a proper system. The fact is that there is no system, there is no thought, it is make it up as you go along and we'll cross that bridge when we come to it

Its not good enough and it will never be good enough.

katydid

man_no_plan wrote: »

Not forgetting that in most centres plc students are off for work xperience and wind up early befor teh summer allowing TIME for all the marking and moderation.

Apeals are to the school!!!! Who re marks them? Only one teacher of Rurais favourite subject mandarin Chinese, appeal is lodged - who looks at it? Same teacher? External teacher?

Katydid I appreciate where you are coming from and agree that it could work in theory oaf there was a proper system. The fact is that there is no system, there is no thought, it is make it up as you go along and we'll cross that bridge when we come to it

Its not good enough and it will never be good enough.

A few classes off for a week now and then isn't going to give you much time for correcting, and you can't possibly leave it all until May. It needs to be all done by the time the students finish; the only thing left to correct at that stage would be the end of year exams, which you have to dash to correct before the externs come.

Appeals are not to the school. They are to FETAC. Once you have submitted your marks in May, you have no more to do with it. And that's as it should be.

There IS a system, it DOES work. The hard work that FE centres have put in to developing QA assured systems can be taken on board and used in further developments in other sectors, and even in FE itself.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

You are supposed to get as many externs as possible; the problem is sourcing them. If your centre operates a policy of having a different kind of extern every year, that must be its own policy. It shows the need for a coordinated system.

I've never had a problem sourcing them, FETAC provide a list. Ring someone on the list. My centre isn't big enough to justify two authenticators.

My centre doesn't operate that policy, to the best of my knowledge that's a policy created at ETB level.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

A few classes off for a week now and then isn't going to give you much time for correcting, and you can't possibly leave it all until May. It needs to be all done by the time the students finish; the only thing left to correct at that stage would be the end of year exams, which you have to dash to correct before the externs come.

Appeals are not to the school. They are to FETAC. Once you have submitted your marks in May, you have no more to do with it. And that's as it should be.

There IS a system, it DOES work. The hard work that FE centres have put in to developing QA assured systems can be taken on board and used in further developments in other sectors, and even in FE itself.

Are you a centre co-ordinator? I ask because you seem hell bent on ploughing the same furrow over and over again. If it happens in your centre, it must be right and everyone else is wrong.

I am the PLC co-ordinator for my centre. If there is an appeal, I have to deal with it. That may involve getting another tutor to correct it, getting another extern in to view it etc. I've never had an appeal but I do know that students have 10 days to appeal their results once they have received them and they contact the school if they want to appeal. So it is part of my job. Of course that leaves difficulties as grades are released at the end of May and I'm on holidays in June, so I would normally tell them to ring me immediately if they want to query a result so I can deal with it before we finish up.

acequion

katydid wrote: »

I am basing what I say on my experience. You can bury your head in the sand all you want and put me on ignore, but it doesn't change the fact that my experience is valid.

You are free to disagree with me, as I disagree with you, but there's no need to carry on like a five year old.

Wow! So,now I'm like a five year old by calling you for what you are! Fine,I'll happily be a five year old while you continue to hog this thread insisting that your way is the only way.

Enjoy!

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I've never had a problem sourcing them, FETAC provide a list. Ring someone on the list. My centre isn't big enough to justify two authenticators.

My centre doesn't operate that policy, to the best of my knowledge that's a policy created at ETB level.

We always have problems sourcing enough, and some years some material has to go unmoderated. But we teachers don't know until the very last minute what moderators we will be getting, so there's no temptation to cut corners or even cheat.

If your ETB doesn't operate the system as it should be, that needs to be addressed. As I said, the system isn't perfect, but it can and does operate properly.

poster2525

katydid wrote: »

You are supposed to get as many externs as possible; the problem is sourcing them. If your centre operates a policy of having a different kind of extern every year, that must be its own policy. It shows the need for a coordinated system.

I agree, we should really have a coordinated system in place ......I know, maybe we could use the current coordinated system that's already in place??

And I already work super hard - not afraid of work here!!

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

We always have problems sourcing enough, and some years some material has to go unmoderated. But we teachers don't know until the very last minute what moderators we will be getting, so there's no temptation to cut corners or even cheat.

If your ETB doesn't operate the system as it should be, that needs to be addressed. As I said, the system isn't perfect, but it can and does operate properly.

You have some cheek saying my ETB doesn't operate correctly when work is going unmoderated in your centre. You've been presenting your centre as the model FE centre for the last day or two. It clearly doesn't operate properly when student work isn't checked.

katydid

acequion wrote: »

Wow! So,now I'm like a five year old by calling you for what you are! Fine,I'll happily be a five year old while you continue to hog this thread.

Enjoy!

You're acting LIKE a five year old for saying you're going to put me on ignore because you don't like what I have to say. Act like a child, I call it as it is.

I'm not hogging this thread; I am putting forward an alternative to every other contributor. If you are afraid of reading alternative viewpoints, maybe this is the wrong place for you.

r93kaey5p2izun

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I've never had a problem sourcing them, FETAC provide a list. Ring someone on the list. My centre isn't big enough to justify two authenticators.

My centre doesn't operate that policy, to the best of my knowledge that's a policy created at ETB level.

We are a fairly large centre - we get two authenticators and it is ETB policy that dictates everything here too. Like you we have a list and no problem getting someone from it.

The problem is as you said rainbowtrout, the fact that very technical modules cannot be properly assessed by anybody but an expert in that area. We run level 5 and 6 technical IT courses (software, programming etc - I don't know the details, not my area!) and we get experts in as authenticators every couple of years. But in a small centre with a variety of courses then it could be a few years between suitable authenticators. And if the technical modules are only one part of a more general major award then chances are there will never be a suitable authenticator.

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

You have some cheek saying my ETB doesn't operate correctly when work is going unmoderated in your centre. You've been presenting your centre as the model FE centre for the last day or two. It clearly doesn't operate properly when student work isn't checked.

Jeez, you don't need to take it personally, unless you are a CEO or something! The idea is to extern as much as possible, not to deliberately limit the amount of externs. If that is what your ETB is doing, it is not operating the system correctly; it's as simple as that.

There is no centre where there is 100% moderation. That is just impractical, given that most moderators are teachers who are themselves run ragged trying to get tehir own paperwork done. As I explained, it's not necessary to have it as long as teachers don't know until the last minute who will be moderated and what won't be.

rainbowtrout

katydid wrote: »

Jeez, you don't need to take it personally, unless you are a CEO or something! The idea is to extern as much as possible, not to deliberately limit the amount of externs. If that is what your ETB is doing, it is not operating the system correctly; it's as simple as that.

There is no centre where there is 100% moderation. That is just impractical, given that most moderators are teachers who are themselves run ragged trying to get tehir own paperwork done. As I explained, it's not necessary to have it as long as teachers don't know until the last minute who will be moderated and what won't be.

Again you are making assumptions about something you know nothing about. Not every centre has hundreds of FE students. There are loads of centres that only have 20-30 students, mine being one of them, and plenty of other centres local to me are similar. So having one extern is usually all that is required.

Every folder in my centre is internally verified. As we know the extern will not scrutinise every one I can be assured that at least every folder has been checked by another tutor to ensure the marks add up and all the work is present that there is a mark for. So from that point of view we have 100% verification. I have no control over how many folders the extern moderates.

seavill

I think the point is being missed.

I think most posters have said they are not against CA. Your points have been that if run properly the system can work. Which is fine.

I think where the other posters are coming from is, the way the jcsa has been (or tried to be) implemented currently there is no proper system in place that you mention. And there is no plan that I have heard of to put it in place.

For it to work properly as you say the correct systems and policies need to be there. Surely this is something that needs to be done day one before there are huge issues. The point being that no structures are in place for the new English course for example which is technically already in place. So the system has already failed.

From reading the thread I think this is where the biggest issue is. Obviously people don't want to correct their own students if a proper structure was in place from day one the opposition might not be as strong but we can all see where this is going being rushed in with no concrete proposals. People's concerns are that it will be too late in two years time to try to fix all the problems that could be sorted with a properly thought through system which is not what we are getting currently

katydid

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Again you are making assumptions about something you know nothing about. Not every centre has hundreds of FE students. There are loads of centres that only have 20-30 students, mine being one of them, and plenty of other centres local to me are similar. So having one extern is usually all that is required.

Every folder in my centre is internally verified. As we know the extern will not scrutinise every one I can be assured that at least every folder has been checked by another tutor to ensure the marks add up and all the work is present that there is a mark for. So from that point of view we have 100% verification. I have no control over how many folders the extern moderates.

I am not making any assumptions. I am well aware that there are centres with one or two class groups. You didn't make it clear that you were operating in that scenario, you just said it was your ETB's policy.