Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
new jc reforms
Comments
-
I teach lots of QQI katydid, it works alright but it's a hell of a lot of more work. I can't see it working in a second level setting or in our second level system. Attendance alone would be a huge issue for us. CA would do the kids harm. They rise to the challenge for 10 days in June but no way they'd be able for the pace of CA in lots of different subjects on lots of different days.
I'm really getting tired of you pulling out the 'teachers questioning their own professionalism' card. There's a lot more to it. We get your opinion on the matter, and have done for months.0 -
... this new course could be a chance to finally teach languages properly. And for that you need levels,smaller classes and a big emphasis on oral. The only part of that trilogy proposed by the DES is the latter. And the latter is not possible in a large mixed group. And "differentiation" is just another fancy term for increased teacher work. But differentiation simply does not work in teaching a group to speak a new language.
....
And for all that no reduction in the PTR!! No reduction in CP hours!! No reduction in forced S&S!! The slashing of sick leave,including pregnancy related sick leave to remain!!
Lunacy to vote anything other than NO.
This is an exceptional post in its entirety. The highlighted parts are the sections which represent the reasons for my most determined "No!" to this proposal. If there is still a single teacher in this state who looks at these "reforms" in isolation, rather than as part of a clear trend to make Irish teachers as malleable and exploitable as English teachers are, the utter myopia of these Irish teachers makes them deserving of having the conditions of employment which English teachers have. Don't come back complaining when your quality of life as a teacher is so abysmal. Low paid, and low conditions. Just how many teachers signed up for both of those (as opposed to just low pay and good conditions) when they became teachers? An Irish teacher voting for this is making an assertion of abject idiocy. Turkeys. Christmas.
I miss Peter Flynt on this forum. At the time I thought he was a bit too cynical - or perhaps in hindsight I just didn't want to hear it. Now, I realise he was right. We, Irish teachers, have been duped. We have been shortsighted. This naive "ah the state is in trouble; we all need to take cuts" thinking in 2009 has morphed into something enormously different now. Now, it is clear that since 2009 the recession has merely been used as an excuse to change the culture of our profession by imposing a workload and the ersatz English culture of enormous bureaucracy upon Irish teachers. The spiritual and vocational aspect to teaching still exists but the weight of these cultural changes are unquestionably killing it, and in very many most of my colleagues it's a dead letter judging by how many have pulled away from volunteering their time to help students after school.0 -
deiseindublin wrote: »I teach lots of QQI katydid, it works alright but it's a hell of a lot of more work. I can't see it working in a second level setting or in our second level system. Attendance alone would be a huge issue for us. CA would do the kids harm. They rise to the challenge for 10 days in June but no way they'd be able for the pace of CA in lots of different subjects on lots of different days.
I'm really getting tired of you pulling out the 'teachers questioning their own professionalism' card. There's a lot more to it. We get your opinion on the matter, and have done for months.
Yes, it's a lot of work. That, and other issue, are what should have been argued. That's not what the basis of teachers' objections were. They were saying they didn't want to have to deal with pressure from parents, and felt they couldn't be objective. That is the bottom line, whether or not you like the fact or not.
There are many reasons to object to the JC changes as they are, but to object to the concept per se for those reasons is irresponsible and unprofessional.0 -
Yes, it's a lot of work. That, and other issue, are what should have been argued. That's not what the basis of teachers' objections were. They were saying they didn't want to have to deal with pressure from parents, and felt they couldn't be objective. That is the bottom line, whether or not you like the fact or not.
There are many reasons to object to the JC changes as they are, but to object to the concept per se for those reasons is irresponsible and unprofessional.
In your opinion.
As someone NOT teaching either JC or LC curricula.
Stop beating the same drum.
The tune is old and grating.
Vote No to the LRA.
Let the HRA run its course.
FEMPI is over.
Time to take the power back.0 -
Inspector Coptoor wrote: »In your opinion.
As someone NOT teaching either JC or LC curricula.
Stop beating the same drum.
The tune is old and grating.
Vote No to the LRA.
Let the HRA run its course.
FEMPI is over.
Time to take the power back.
It is unprofessional to suggest that a teacher is unable to be objective and has a problem withstanding pressure from outside influences.
As someone who does this kind of assessment and sees that it works, I have every right to comment on the issues raised by the colleagues who are questioning the integrity and professionalism of my profession, and by extension, questioning my integrity and professionalism.0 -
Advertisement
-
It is unprofessional to suggest that a teacher is unable to be objective and has a problem withstanding pressure from outside influences.
As someone who does this kind of assessment and sees that it works, I have every right to comment on the issues raised by the colleagues who are questioning the integrity and professionalism of my profession, and by extension, questioning my integrity and professionalism.
Sorry katydid but you are becoming enormously annoying banging on and on about YOUR integrity and professionalism.Can you not see that nobody is agreeing with you so to quote one of our oft used expressions,"Get over yourself!!
Ok you're entitled to your opinions about what works and what doesn't work in your sector but for all your beating the same tune you haven't even told us what exactly you teach. Because I'd be very surprised if you ever taught JC and LC English! Transparency and objectivity are virtually impossible to prove when trying to explain to a student that his/her 7 page short story or debate speech didn't quite have that x factor to make B,or A or whatever the student and his mom and dad think it should have got. Show them the marking sheet and explain ad infinitum and they still say you marked too hard. Hence the protection of the anonymity of the state exam.
JC results came out yesterday and there were quite a few English students in my school who got B where we expected A,C where we expected B etc. Standards are high,too much so for 14-15 year olds in my opinion, and many were disappointed. But they accept that grade from an anonymous source and move on to try to do better at LC. They would never accept it from their own teachers. English is a subject where an experienced teacher/ examiner knows almost instinctively what standard a student has,but because you are evaluating something intangible, it is very difficult to justify the rationale of your mark,despite working to a "transparent", "objective" marking scheme.0 -
Sorry katydid but you are becoming enormously annoying banging on and on about YOUR integrity and professionalism.Can you not see that nobody is agreeing with you so to quote one of our oft used expressions,"Get over yourself!!
Ok you're entitled to your opinions about what works and what doesn't work in your sector but for all your beating the same tune you haven't even told us what exactly you teach. Because I'd be very surprised if you ever taught JC and LC English! Transparency and objectivity are virtually impossible to prove when trying to explain to a student that his/her 7 page short story or debate speech didn't quite have that x factor to make B,or A or whatever the student and his mom and dad think it should have got. Show them the marking sheet and explain ad infinitum and they still say you marked too hard. Hence the protection of the anonymity of the state exam.
JC results came out yesterday and there were quite a few English students in my school who got B where we expected A,C where we expected B etc. Standards are high,too much so for 14-15 year olds in my opinion, and many were disappointed. But they accept that grade from an anonymous source and move on to try to do better at LC. They would never accept it from their own teachers. English is a subject where an experienced teacher/ examiner knows almost instinctively what standard a student has,but because you are evaluating something intangible, it is very difficult to justify the rationale of your mark,despite working to a "transparent", "objective" marking scheme.
Well, I'm sorry if it annoys you, but you know, I love my job, I do it well, and I consider people who question my capacity to do it quite annoy me.
I am telling you that it can be done objectively, you are telling me you can't. You design the assignments so that the marking scheme is as clear as it can be, and if, on rare occasions, there is some room for tweaking, that's where your experience and professional judgement comes in.
Your colleagues in this country and elsewhere manage, so the clear difference is that you don't have faith in your own objectivity.0 -
[...]
I am telling you that it can be done objectively, you are telling me you can't. You design the assignments so that the marking scheme is as clear as it can be, and if, on rare occasions, there is some room for tweaking, that's where your experience and professional judgement comes in.
....
Yes we do that every day at our own professional discretion as befits our class and their needs. Why the need for other 'experts' (read: politicians advised by whom exactly??? spin doctors from the media) to tell us how to do it en masse and at the same time (no matter what the educational need for our particular class).
What is the theoretical rationale for this change that every teacher must conform and adopt a particular teaching methodology?
... just cos other countries do it!!!
... just cos its done in FE!!!
... I dunno just cos ...teachers are being unprofessional if they don't?
Lets get down to the research backing this... can someone point to a publication or journal article and we can get started. Otherwise it's change for the sake of change.0 -
So if you do it every day, and trust your professional judgement and experience, why does that fly out the window when it comes to state certification?Yes we do that every day at our own professional discretion as befits our class and their needs. Why the need for other 'experts' (read: politicians advised by whom exactly??? spin doctors from the media) to tell us how to do it en masse and at the same time (no matter what the educational need for our particular class).
What is the theoretical rationale for this change that every teacher must conform and adopt a particular teaching methodology?
... just cos other countries do it!!!
... just cos its done in FE!!!
... I dunno just cos ...teachers are being unprofessional if they don't?
Lets get down to the research backing this... can someone point to a publication or journal article and we can get started. Otherwise it's change for the sake of change.
Nobody's telling you to do anything en masse or to adopt any particular teaching methodology, only to adopt an assessment methodology. You already teach to an assessment methodology - the end of cycle written exam.
Change that allows those learners who are not good at or can't handle the stress of once off, written exams is hardly change for the sake of change. We already have this facility in LCA, and it is excellent.
Other countries do it because it's FAIR to more students. FE does it because it's FAIR to more students.0 -
It works very well in most places where it is used. Here in Ireland and abroad. I have seen the disaster in the UK and I have seen the way it works successfully in Germany.
I think it's a shame for Irish students, who deserve a better system than just a final exam, and it's a shame for the profession, that second level teachers have basically said they don't have the professionalism to do what hundreds of thousands of their colleagues do all the time.
In Germany where there are 3 types of secondary schools generally linked to ability. Where students repeat a year when grades are not up to scratch or change to a more suitable school. Where class sizes are smaller. Where children arriving to Germany with little or poor German are placed in a different class until their German is up to scratch. Where SEN students are not always (usually not in my experience) integrated in a mainstream class. Where teachers don't take football teams after class and where schools are bigger and more anonymous. Where teachers are still pretty well respected in society and well paid one permanent. Where teaching is a profession and not a pert-time job while building up hours for 5 years. Where teachers aren't expected to spoon-feed to the extent we do here.
We are heading towards common level classes- common as in higher and ordinary level, mild to severe special educational needs, poor levels of English etc all in one 'class' with one teacher who can now assess their grades. Get real. Those of us who are actually working in the current system as it stands have every right to say whet we will and won't accept. People working in a different sector can speculate but haven't actually got a clue.0 -
Advertisement
-
In Germany where there are 3 types of secondary schools generally linked to ability. Where students repeat a year when grades are not up to scratch or change to a more suitable school. Where class sizes are smaller. Where children arriving to Germany with little or poor German are placed in a different class until their German is up to scratch. Where SEN students are not always (usually not in my experience) integrated in a mainstream class. Where teachers don't take football teams after class and where schools are bigger and more anonymous. Where teachers are still pretty well respected in society and well paid one permanent. Where teaching is a profession and not a pert-time job while building up hours for 5 years. Where teachers aren't expected to spoon-feed to the extent we do here.
We are heading towards common level classes- common as in higher and ordinary level, mild to severe special educational needs, poor levels of English etc all in one 'class' with one teacher who can now assess their grades. Get real. Those of us who are actually working in the current system as it stands have every right to say whet we will and won't accept. People working in a different sector can speculate but haven't actually got a clue.
I can do a hell of a lot more than speculate. I have worked in the German system, in the UK system and in the Irish system at second level, and now I work at FE level. I have used the CA system in Germany and in the UK and here at FE level.
The difference in ability is not a factor in the integrity of the assessment system. The school I taught in in Germany was a Realschule, the middle ranking of the three tier system. I know from relations who went to Gymnasium that the level of assessment was different, because the level of the subject was different. But the principle is the same; weekly or fortnightly tests are carried out, marked and the notes kept over the length of the year, and the length of the cycle. For the Abitur, the equivalent of the LC, two thirds of the grade is calculated on these tests and one third on end of cycle exam, of which a couple can be orals, where the mark is given by a panel of teachers.
I don't like the German system for many reasons, the three tier system being one of them, because young people are consigned to a certain level of expectation at the age of 10. But their continuous assessment system works well, and has done so for years. It's not a fancy or airy fairy system, it's a series of Klassenarbeit, or class tests, which are transparent and objective. The motivation amongst students is very high, not just at Gymnasium level. In my first few weeks, I was astonished that the kids were asking me when the next Klassenarbeit was - they were anxious to keep up their grades, and had no trepidation about it, as the tests were so regular, they were well used to them, and knew that if one lot didn't go too well, they had time to catch up.
I have also taught in the UK and there, CA is an unmitigated disaster, because it is far too airy fairy, and is basically a box ticking exercise, with students given chance after chance to come back and resit the same assessment to get a better mark.
We don't have to slavishly follow any system. The German one is very rigid, the UK one is the opposite. I don't have direct experience of others at second level, but I know that it is perfectly possible to set up a system that is easy to administer as well as fair and objective.
I may not be actually working in the current system at second level, but I am working in the same education system with learners just out of second level. Many of them have come through LCA, where they have been assessed for state certification by their teachers without any hullaballoo. As I said before, assessment is assessment, whether a student is twelve or twenty two. You set the assessment, you mark it, you give it back, you explain where marks were awarded or lost. If someone queries your marks, you have the documentation to back them up. End of story.
All this stuff about not being able to be objective or to resist pressure is nonsense; your colleagues teaching LCA and QQI can do it. There are many reasons to oppose the proposed reforms, but to focus on those is ridiculous.0 -
All this stuff about not being able to be objective or to resist pressure is nonsense; your colleagues teaching LCA and QQI can do it. There are many reasons to oppose the proposed reforms, but to focus on those is ridiculous.
The "nonsense" and the "ridiculous" at this point is your repetitiveness!! Your posts are saying the same thing over and over and over and over again.
You've been given several reasons and examples by several posters as to why assessment of one's own pupils at second level is not so black and white, yet you refuse to even acknowledge our views and experiences. How obtuse is that!
Your attitude is going beyond annoying and is now becoming insulting. At the start of this thread I asked you appealingly "Must you hog this one too?" Obviously you must.
This is not about YOU and what YOU think and believe. You've told us in multitudes of posts! This is about whether we,the second level teachers,should accept or not the current set of proposals.
A shame that the stubbornness of one poster is constantly derailing discussion. I've no doubt you'll be indignantly rebutting this post as you have done with all posts. Off you go katydid,have the last word,because I've had enough!0 -
And the posts that respond to me are saying the same thing over and over again too. Ignoring the evidence from their colleagues in Ireland and around the world, and claiming that, because they work in the sector (although most of them have never operated a similar system) they know better than those who have operated it successfully.The "nonsense" and the "ridiculous" at this point is your repetitiveness!! Your posts are saying the same thing over and over and over and over again.
You've been given several reasons and examples by several posters as to why assessment of one's own pupils at second level is not so black and white, yet you refuse to even acknowledge our views and experiences. How obtuse is that!
Your attitude is going beyond annoying and is now becoming insulting. At the start of this thread I asked you appealingly "Must you hog this one too?" Obviously you must.
This is not about YOU and what YOU think and believe. You've told us in multitudes of posts! This is about whether we,the second level teachers,should accept or not the current set of proposals.
A shame that the stubbornness of one poster is constantly derailing discussion. I've no doubt you'll be indignantly rebutting this post as you have done with all posts. Off you go katydid,have the last word,because I've had enough!
I have been given no reasons as to why a teacher can't be objective and professional. I've been given examples which I thoroughly agree with, such as the methodologies proposed, the workload etc. Those are valid objections, and should be paramount.
I find it insulting to have my professionalism questioned repeatedly. If you find it insulting to have it pointed out that it is unprofessional to claim that you can't be objective or resist outside pressure, well, there's not much I can do about that. Perhaps you could consider what being a professional teacher means - that's it about giving the student the best possible opportunity, not making life easy for yourself by not having to face Johnny's mammy in Tesco.
This certainly is not about me and what I believe, and I have never suggested any such thing. It is about what the facts show, and the facts show that in this country and elsewhere, CA for state certification happens without the problems the second level teachers here are claiming will happen. You do NOT discuss marks with parents or anyone else other than the feedback you give the student and you remain objective by a proper and transparent marking scheme.
This is a thread about the proposed JC reforms. If people are to make decisions which affect the future of education in Ireland, they need to make informed decisions.
If you want a mutual appreciation society where everyone nods in agreement with each other and has no interest in hearing facts which endanger their opinions, fine, set up a thread to that effect. These boards are for debate and exchange of ideas. I find it extremely worrying that, as a teacher, you seem so upset by someone daring to challenge your pre-conceived ideas.0 -
In fairness, this is at least the second thread on the junior cert that you have taken over by continually harping on about objectivity and professionalism and ignoring any other points by posters. I chose to stop commenting in the last thread because of this. Again, I am watching you ignore the points people are making and bring it back to an attack on their beliefs. I worry sometimes about how you can take a whole piece of text with valid and well thought out points and completely ignore it.0
-
I have taught LCA for years and at no stage have I ever been required to submit a grade or mark for any of my students. LCA teachers do not assess their own students. External examiners come in to assess projects and conduct interviews on various tasks. Students have a terminal exam in June like all other Leaving Cert students. Project work and orals and interviews are all externally assessed by external examiners appointed by State Exams commission. The role of the classroom teacher is to guide students, ensure they complete assignments and tasks and submit records to say they have completed or not competed assignments. We never grade or give marks. It's a completely externally assessed exam. Maybe your former students were under the impression that they got a grade from the teacher. This is simply not the case. I have taught three LCA subjects for over 15 years.I can do a hell of a lot more than speculate. I have worked in the German system, in the UK system and in the Irish system at second level, and now I work at FE level. I have used the CA system in Germany and in the UK and here at FE level.
The difference in ability is not a factor in the integrity of the assessment system. The school I taught in in Germany was a Realschule, the middle ranking of the three tier system. I know from relations who went to Gymnasium that the level of assessment was different, because the level of the subject was different. But the principle is the same; weekly or fortnightly tests are carried out, marked and the notes kept over the length of the year, and the length of the cycle. For the Abitur, the equivalent of the LC, two thirds of the grade is calculated on these tests and one third on end of cycle exam, of which a couple can be orals, where the mark is given by a panel of teachers.
I don't like the German system for many reasons, the three tier system being one of them, because young people are consigned to a certain level of expectation at the age of 10. But their continuous assessment system works well, and has done so for years. It's not a fancy or airy fairy system, it's a series of Klassenarbeit, or class tests, which are transparent and objective. The motivation amongst students is very high, not just at Gymnasium level. In my first few weeks, I was astonished that the kids were asking me when the next Klassenarbeit was - they were anxious to keep up their grades, and had no trepidation about it, as the tests were so regular, they were well used to them, and knew that if one lot didn't go too well, they had time to catch up.
I have also taught in the UK and there, CA is an unmitigated disaster, because it is far too airy fairy, and is basically a box ticking exercise, with students given chance after chance to come back and resit the same assessment to get a better mark.
We don't have to slavishly follow any system. The German one is very rigid, the UK one is the opposite. I don't have direct experience of others at second level, but I know that it is perfectly possible to set up a system that is easy to administer as well as fair and objective.
I may not be actually working in the current system at second level, but I am working in the same education system with learners just out of second level. Many of them have come through LCA, where they have been assessed for state certification by their teachers without any hullaballoo. As I said before, assessment is assessment, whether a student is twelve or twenty two. You set the assessment, you mark it, you give it back, you explain where marks were awarded or lost. If someone queries your marks, you have the documentation to back them up. End of story.
All this stuff about not being able to be objective or to resist pressure is nonsense; your colleagues teaching LCA and QQI can do it. There are many reasons to oppose the proposed reforms, but to focus on those is ridiculous.0 -
I find it worrying that when your ideas are challenged, you cannot accept that you may be wrong.
FYI, I have worked in 2 other European countries and been involved in marking using CA and I don't like it and don't want it imposed here.
However, the CA issue is just one part f the new JC reforms I disagree with.
As a science teacher it irks me greatly that my subject is to be downgraded from 240 hours of tuition to only 200 hours with a much dumbed down syllabus.
I resent the Croke Park Agreement, the Haddington Road Agreement and the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
I'm done with my job changing negatively year on year.
You arent in the same position as us and, while you are welcome to contribute to the discussion, I would appreciate if you could add something, ANYTHING else to the thread bar the same old clap trap.0 -
I've added a poll to see what way people feel overall, for whatever reason.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20574921240 -
And I worry that somebody could be a teacher,with enormous power to influence, and is so incredibly stubborn and intransigent.
This same poster,in addition to an almost hysterical repetition of one particular point, is also patronising and insulting everybody who challenges this point by casting snide aspersions at their professionalism. To the extent that threads have been virtually abandoned.
Such conduct is unacceptable!0 -
And I worry that somebody could be a teacher,with enormous power to influence, and is so incredibly stubborn and intransigent.
This same poster,in addition to an almost hysterical repetition of one particular point, is also patronising and insulting everybody who challenges this point by casting snide aspersions at their professionalism. To the extent that threads have been virtually abandoned.
Such conduct is unacceptable!
Stubborn and intransigent because I refuse to accept what I know from experience to be wrong? Now if I lacked integrity, I would just admit that something I know to be wrong was right....
Funny how your repeating the same point isn't insulting, but my repeating the same point is "insulting".0 -
Inspector Coptoor wrote: »I find it worrying that when your ideas are challenged, you cannot accept that you may be wrong.
FYI, I have worked in 2 other European countries and been involved in marking using CA and I don't like it and don't want it imposed here.
However, the CA issue is just one part f the new JC reforms I disagree with.
As a science teacher it irks me greatly that my subject is to be downgraded from 240 hours of tuition to only 200 hours with a much dumbed down syllabus.
I resent the Croke Park Agreement, the Haddington Road Agreement and the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
I'm done with my job changing negatively year on year.
You arent in the same position as us and, while you are welcome to contribute to the discussion, I would appreciate if you could add something, ANYTHING else to the thread bar the same old clap trap.
Why would I accept something as wrong when I know it's not wrong? CA can be a disaster, or it can work very well. In this country, where it is used in QQI, it works well. Do you actually expect me to say that I am unprofessional and have no integrity when it comes to doing my job, when I know that is not true?
CP, Lansdowne Rd. etc. have nothing to do with this. The reality is that Irish students deserve better than the system they have now, and that instead of trying to make it better, their teachers are digging their heels and refusing to even contemplate change. There are, as you say, huge issues such the downgrading of subjects, that need to be tackled.
Instead of standing up to the Dept. and demanding a better system, they have just refused to do it at all.
I AM in the same position as you - I am a teacher, I stand in front of students and I mark their work. That is what you do. The age profile doesn't matter, the principle is the same0 -
Advertisement
-
My apologies. You're absolutely right.I have taught LCA for years and at no stage have I ever been required to submit a grade or mark for any of my students. LCA teachers do not assess their own students. External examiners come in to assess projects and conduct interviews on various tasks. .0 -
neverfinished wrote: »In fairness, this is at least the second thread on the junior cert that you have taken over by continually harping on about objectivity and professionalism and ignoring any other points by posters. I chose to stop commenting in the last thread because of this. Again, I am watching you ignore the points people are making and bring it back to an attack on their beliefs. I worry sometimes about how you can take a whole piece of text with valid and well thought out points and completely ignore it.
I have ignored nothing. I have responded to all the points made, with examples of how fellow teachers here and elsewhere manage to overcome the issues proposed as difficulties.
If someone who is a fellow professional tries to denigrate my profession by claiming they are unable to be objective or to resist external pressure when carrying out their professional duties, I feel perfectly entitled to question this belief, and to explain how they are wrong.
Why is that such a problem?0 -
Wow!!!!0
-
I have ignored nothing. I have responded to all the points made, with examples of how fellow teachers here and elsewhere manage to overcome the issues proposed as difficulties.
If someone who is a fellow professional tries to denigrate my profession by claiming they are unable to be objective or to resist external pressure when carrying out their professional duties, I feel perfectly entitled to question this belief, and to explain how they are wrong.
Why is that such a problem?
It's a problem because you are not in the same position as teachers on temporary contracts and as NQTs so you aren't facing the same pressures that they are in the current environment.
Thus you need to get off your high horse about people that you claim "denigrate" your profession and have some empathy and understanding that your position and point of view is not the only one and that people are trying to discuss their genuine concerns based on THEIR experiences and situations NOT yours. They need support and advice and don't need your holier than thou attitude rammed down their throats.0 -
Katydid you know very well that QQI is a shambles under many providers. You know that the QQI system is not enough to ensure consistency and high standards across the board. You have agreed with this before because this has been discussed at length before.
Of course CA can be run professionally in Ireland and is in many cases. We know that and it has been discussed ad nauseum in previous threads that you have taken over. But it already doesn't work in many cases - including in Ireland, as previously admitted by you. You are not the only one with experience of CA in various settings. Nobody is questioning that you have seen it work in limited settings. But it absolutely does not work across the board and the very fact that the very same QQI system you exalt fails in many other settings should be enough to show that it is not consistent or fair or of a high standard. It can be, it is in many cases, but it's not in plenty of others and therefore it's not good enough.
You don't want to ape a failed English system, well I don't want to ape a failing QQI system. The JC reform proposals are not good enough so I will vote no. You are not discussing current reform proposals you are simply restating your confidence in the system in which you work over and over again while ignoring other people's experiences.0 -
Trent Damaged Guitar wrote: »Katydid you know very well that QQI is a shambles under many providers. You know that the QQI system is not enough to ensure consistency and high standards across the board.
The most high profile one being FAS. Arguably the single biggest provider of FETAC qualifications in the country.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fas-whistleblower-is-now-being-persecuted-by-agency-claims-td-30028849.html
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/whistleblower-at-fas-got-100k-to-settle-grades-case-30013640.html0 -
Trent Damaged Guitar wrote: »Katydid you know very well that QQI is a shambles under many providers. You know that the QQI system is not enough to ensure consistency and high standards across the board. You have agreed with this before because this has been discussed at length before.
Of course CA can be run professionally in Ireland and is in many cases. We know that and it has been discussed ad nauseum in previous threads that you have taken over. But it already doesn't work in many cases - including in Ireland, as previously admitted by you. You are not the only one with experience of CA in various settings. Nobody is questioning that you have seen it work in limited settings. But it absolutely does not work across the board and the very fact that the very same QQI system you exalt fails in many other settings should be enough to show that it is not consistent or fair or of a high standard. It can be, it is in many cases, but it's not in plenty of others and therefore it's not good enough.
You don't want to ape a failed English system, well I don't want to ape a failing QQI system. The JC reform proposals are not good enough so I will vote no. You are not discussing current reform proposals you are simply restating your confidence in the system in which you work over and over again while ignoring other people's experiences.
QQI is not a shambles under the Dept. of Education. When you privatise education and turn it into a business, you get a shambles. The second level sector is not being Fásified by the Department. Not yet. If that starts, that will be time to take on that battle.
The JC reforms are NOT good enough. You are right. For many reasons. But not because teachers are incapable of being objective or withstanding pressure.
What do you mean "ignoring other people's experiences"? We have not had CA of this type for state certification in our second level system, so those teachers objecting to it don't, for the most part, have experience of it. The facts are that in most parts of the world - there is more to the world than the UK - it works, and works well. THAT is the experience that matters. Not what people think about something they have never experienced.0 -
Most of the people I work with are on temporary contracts. No one comes under pressure from external sources to change marks, because the marks are there for all to see. It is simply not an issue. For permanent, for part timers, for anyone.History Queen wrote: »It's a problem because you are not in the same position as teachers on temporary contracts and as NQTs so you aren't facing the same pressures that they are in the current environment.
Thus you need to get off your high horse about people that you claim "denigrate" your profession and have some empathy and understanding that your position and point of view is not the only one and that people are trying to discuss their genuine concerns based on THEIR experiences and situations NOT yours. They need support and advice and don't need your holier than thou attitude rammed down their throats.
I didn't realise from the thread title that one is obliged to disagree on principle with CA for state certification, or that those who disagree don't want anything other than mutual back slapping for being in opposition to it.
For some strange reason, I thought this was a forum for debate and discussion, and that, in forming opinions about this issue, it might be useful to hear the experience of someone who actually uses the system successfully, and to note similar experiences in other countries.0 -
QQI is not a shambles under the Dept. of Education. When you privatise education and turn it into a business, you get a shambles. The second level sector is not being Fásified by the Department. Not yet. If that starts, that will be time to take on that battle...
Believe me, QQI is a shambles in many ETB centres!0 -
Advertisement
-
I enjoy reading T&L threads most of the time but it's getting to the stage where I can't face reading the same opinion being rammed down everyone's throats, day in, day out.
I couldn't be arsed arguing any point back, it's like a brick wall.0
Advertisement