Students taught wrong material

cnn27

I don't understand why the set texts need to change every year though, it seems an unnecessary complication. I teach in England and for all its flaws at times, at least the texts stay the same each year in my subject. I can easily see how a mistake like this could happen if they change each year, it's just missing the different between 2018 and 2019 on a long list (I'm assuming - have never actually seen the English curriculum documents) which is a simple mistake we've all made at some stage (but thankfully with less serious consequences).

Bananaleaf

spurious wrote: »

Why did corrector of mock papers not mention it in their report (which both mock companies require correctors to write)?

I can think of at least two good reasons why this wasn't picked up at the mocks.

First, it's quite possible that the mocks were either not corrected properly at all, or

Second, it's also possible that the corrector didn't know that the film in question wasn't on the course.

The comparative section of the exam is marked according to comparisons made. I'm not saying that it isn't about the content of the individual texts, but it is more about the manner in which they are compared and contrasted. If you're focusing on comparisons made and links between texts and you are correcting a few schools, who are all doing different films, novels, plays, it's totally understandable that this wasn't noticed. Not acceptable, but understandable.

spurious wrote: »

Still, at a minimum, the English Dept. should have agreed on what texts/films they were going to cover. What were they going to do if someone switched class?

I don't agree with this point. I don't think the choice of which texts to study should be taken away from individual teachers. Students should not be changing classes 8-10 weeks into 5th year so if dept schemes of work aimed to begin with a poet and some paper 1 work, final class lists would be set before any of the paper 2 texts were touched.

Presumably texts need to be ordered though and this should happen as a dept. At that point, someone ordering a text or DVD that's not on the prescribed list would raise eyebrows.

acequion

Blaizes wrote: »

Just want to say reading back on my earlier post I realise it sounds a little harsh. Still I think people need to check and check again and check again.Some schools are better at collaboration than others as has been mentioned and maybe there is a lesson in all of this for all teachers - better communication.

Yes I found your earlier post quite harsh. That said, you are right that this is something that needs to be checked and double checked.

I teach 5th and 6th English every year and it's true that the degree of chopping and changing texts is just crazy. As someone already pointed out,there are about 30 options on the prescribed list and it's a guessing game each year re what stays and what goes. Basically teachers have to prepare brand new stuff every year in that section. Not an excuse for making a huge professional mistake but easy to see how it can happen.

Also, collaboration with collegues is a big buzz word nowadays. It has its merits but is not a cure all and would not necessarily prevent such an error unless a Dept planned absolutely everything together and where's the time or the need for that? And at the end of the day it's an individual teacher's responsibility to double check the course and to deliver it to a class.

acequion

Bananaleaf wrote: »

I can think of at least two good reasons why this wasn't picked up at the mocks.

First, it's quite possible that the mocks were either not corrected properly at all, or

Second, it's also possible that the corrector didn't know that the film in question wasn't on the course.

The comparative section of the exam is marked according to comparisons made. I'm not saying that it isn't about the content of the individual texts, but it is more about the manner in which they are compared and contrasted. If you're focusing on comparisons made and links between texts and you are correcting a few schools, who are all doing different films, novels, plays, it's totally understandable that this wasn't noticed. Not acceptable, but understandable.



I don't agree with this point. I don't think the choice of which texts to study should be taken away from individual teachers. Students should not be changing classes 8-10 weeks into 5th year so if dept schemes of work aimed to begin with a poet and some paper 1 work, final class lists would be set before any of the paper 2 texts were touched.

Presumably texts need to be ordered though and this should happen as a dept. At that point, someone ordering a text or DVD that's not on the prescribed list would raise eyebrows.

Completely agree re the emboldened. We have already become very standardised as a profession and there needs to be scope for individual choice and individual styles, especially in the more creative subjects. Also, if teachers over collaborate on texts, sharing all notes and all resources, you'll then have the kids all singing off the same proverbial hymn sheet in the exam which will do them no favours at all. Examiners reward originality and penalise the type of uniformity where the candidate has merely absorbed a doled out system. And if they're all studying the exact same thing in pretty much the exact same way, that's what you'll get.

Blaizes

acequion wrote: »

Yes I found your earlier post quite harsh. That said, you are right that this is something that needs to be checked and double checked.

I teach 5th and 6th English every year and it's true that the degree of chopping and changing texts is just crazy. As someone already pointed out,there are about 30 options on the prescribed list and it's a guessing game each year re what stays and what goes. Basically teachers have to prepare brand new stuff every year in that section. Not an excuse for making a huge professional mistake but easy to see how it can happen.

Also, collaboration with collegues is a big buzz word nowadays. It has its merits but is not a cure all and would not necessarily prevent such an error unless a Dept planned absolutely everything together and where's the time or the need for that? And at the end of the day it's an individual teacher's responsibility to double check the course and to deliver it to a class.

I was coming from my own experience of being the teacher left to pick up the pieces, a bunch of high achievers sitting in front of me and having to tell them they'd studied the wrong text, not good. Anyway moving on from all of that I agree there is no time for collaboration but even a simple five to ten minute meeting, all dept. teachers cross check their text selection with DES list, record new list, log it in vware. Done.Less likelihood of a mistake being made where a few dept. members are involved because someone will spot it.

evolving_doors

Blaizes wrote: »

I was coming from my own experience of being the teacher left to pick up the pieces, a bunch of high achievers sitting in front of me and having to tell them they'd studied the wrong text, not good. Anyway moving on from all of that I agree there is no time for collaboration but even a simple five to ten minute meeting, all dept. teachers cross check their text selection with DES list, record new list, log it in vware. Done.Less likelihood of a mistake being made where a few dept. members are involved because someone will spot it.

Ya it doesn't take much, I've heard teachers passing in the staff room asking each other what they were at and why they chose that particular text etc.
I reckon a lot more English teachers will get a bit of impetus to check in with each other now.

I wouldn't vilify the teacher involved as it was an easy mistake to make...if you're doing a solo run!! It reminds me a lot of when the exam invigilator gave out the wrong paper. As long as some failsafe is put in afterwords then it's a lesson learned.