Deferred State Exams 2020 [SEE MOD NOTE POST #1]

Treppen

Joe Duffy today was 100% predictive grading.

Mardy Bum

The principals in the RTE article who came out in support of predictive grading on the basis that there are lots of results in schools from previous exams should be made do an M.Ed in Assessment.

The utter ignorance of those with the most power in schools in relation to assessment as well as teaching and learning in general is telling.

joe40

I teach in the north and we are using predictive testing.
The difference is most subjects have module results to work from. These are not mocks but actual exams set and examined by exam board's which form part of the final grade.
For example for my GCSE students they have already completed exams last year which are worth 33% of their final mark. This is significant evidence to work from and much more reliable than class tests.

Without module exam results I have no idea how predicting marks could be done with fairness and accuracy.

Pupils work differently when exams matter.
I think it would be fairer to use JC results from 2 years ago than mocks.

mtoutlemonde

rainbowtrout wrote: »

As it should be, and as it was when it was announced on Good Friday.

Now if the Indo and the Times could stop printing shite about predicted grades the world would be a much better place.

Yeah there was an awful lot of waffle last night from Thomas Byrne last night on the Tonight Show - using previous results, predictive grading - I was embarrassed at his lack of intelligence. God help us if he is our Minister of Education. Thankfully, the ophthalmic surgeon put him in his place.

I completely blame the media for spreading worry and stress on our young people - they have enough to be doing. Again someone mentioned it before, it is marketing for the future.

Let the people who make the decisions, make the decisions and we will worry about it at the time.

ooter

students calling in to joe duffy today talking about living with parents with existing health issues and not wanting to sit in a room with a number of other students in case they bring the virus home to their parents. the LC is stressful enough without having that extra worry added on.

rainbowtrout

Rosita wrote: »

Why wouldn't numbers be dropping with most people staying at home most of the time, widespread social distancing, and an inability to do the level of testing that they've promised? If levels weren't dropping it'd be astonishing. In fact the slowness of the drop is difficult to explain.

But people saying that 29 July is the only show in town is quite another matter. There are still lots of opinions and this is still well up for grabs I reckon.

Almost a quarter of the cases are healthcare employees. That's quite a sizeable proportion.

They are not going to pull it forward when they have put that date out there, if they push it back later into August it will impact further on the new school year with schools being used for exams and teachers being used to mark exams.

km79

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The principals in the RTE article who came out in support of predictive grading on the basis that there are lots of results in schools from previous exams should be made do an M.Ed in Assessment.

The utter ignorance of those with the most power in schools in relation to assessment as well as teaching and learning in general is telling.

Less hassle for them trying to arrange exam centres for large numbers whilst social distancing etc
It was telling when Colm o Rourke came out in support of dual option so quickly

Mardy Bum

km79 wrote: »

Less hassle for them trying to arrange exam centres for large numbers whilst social distancing etc
It was telling when Colm o Rourke came out in support of dual option so quickly

Imagine a hospital manager calling for people to stay at home if they feel sick because he didn't want to do his job but pretending there was some logic behind it.

This is what is happening.

r93kaey5p2izun

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The principals in the RTE article who came out in support of predictive grading on the basis that there are lots of results in schools from previous exams should be made do an M.Ed in Assessment.

The utter ignorance of those with the most power in schools in relation to assessment as well as teaching and learning in general is telling.

I don't think it's surprising when so many principals have comparatively little classroom teaching experience, and often that was a long time ago. The principal of my former school taught for 9 years, including 2 years part time subbing, and hasn't taught a class in over 20 years. He's not unusual in that.

Being a great teacher does not necessarily lead to being a great principal, so I'm not saying anything against this, but it must be recognised that principals are absolutely not the people to ask when it comes to examining the realities of assessment in the classroom. Tbh, they mostly don't have a clue. If the boxes to keep an inspector happy are ticked, and parents aren't whinging to them, then they rarely have any real input and definitely no real experience of current practices. I read a very good article recently about how education policy and pedagogy discussion forums so often exclude teachers. "Where are the teachers?" it asked. Good question. If it comes to predictive grading then the very people who are the experts (on current classroom assessment practices and the likely implications of using classroom grades for another purpose), the very people who will have to implement it, will be the people with the least input it seems.

Rosita

[QUOTE=rainbowtrout;113361232

They are not going to pull it forward when they have put that date out there, if they push it back later into August it will impact further on the new school year with schools being used for exams and teachers being used to mark exams.[/QUOTE]

If the dates have to change they'll change. The exit from the lockdown spoke of schools opening in September on a phased basis. There wasn't much reaction to that but it was in there. So this will be a start of year like no other anyway. I'd say if they could get the LC sat they'd happily take the hit on starting school back a few weeks later. Okay, maybe not 'happily' - you're obviously right that it'd be disruptive but still it could be done.

doc_17

The SF education spokesperson on Education was incoherent on RTÉ news at 1 today.

joebloggs32

Dylan94 wrote: »

This is what I am worried about. I give students very difficult exams and often mark quite harshly. We also were not nearly finished the course when they done their mocks. Many of my students failed the mock exam (that I corrected). But I know that they would have done much better in the real exam. There is one student that I would be very confident that they would achieve an H1, who if we were to use the data already held would result in him getting maybe H5

100%
I hadn't the full course covered so choice was limited.
I purposely didn't look over and scripts that were near the next grade up after marking them (as often happens in the state exams). I want students to be motivated to move up a grade. I also marked as hard as I could.

One girl who would potentially be H1 got just below the H2, so is down for a H3.
Her project probly would be given full marks but I was not counting this.
So if I were to give her a H1 it would not look credible as very rarely will anyone move up that much in my experience (15 years)

The media (and Thomas Byrne) are really trying to generate a story here that really can't be decided on yet.
I would be fairly sure at this stage there is a plan b, c even d being worked out., but for now until June we really need to stick with the current plan and see what the situation is then.

randylonghorn

Treppen wrote: »

Joe Duffy today was 100% predictive grading.

Another good argument against that option ...

joe40 wrote: »

I teach in the north and we are using predictive testing.
The difference is most subjects have module results to work from. These are not mocks but actual exams set and examined by exam board's which form part of the final grade.

For example for my GCSE students they have already completed exams last year which are worth 33% of their final mark. This is significant evidence to work from and much more reliable than class tests.

Without module exam results I have no idea how predicting marks could be done with fairness and accuracy.

And even at that, Joe, a study a couple of years ago comparing predicted grades with actual grades achieved in the UK found only a 16% accuracy.

Rosita wrote: »

The exit from the lockdown spoke of schools opening in September on a phased basis. There wasn't much reaction to that but it was in there. So this will be a start of year like no other anyway. I'd say if they could get the LC sat they'd happily take the hit on starting school back a few weeks later. Okay, maybe not 'happily' - you're obviously right that it'd be disruptive but still it could be done.

I could easily see them trying to get the (new) 6th and 3rd years back as near to normal dates as possible, and maybe delaying the other years a couple of weeks, even if things are fairly under control C-19 wise.

With a lot of teachers involved in correcting LC, assuming current plan sticks, it would ease the pressure a fair bit.

Rosita

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

Yeah there was an awful lot of waffle last night from Thomas Byrne last night on the Tonight Show - using previous results, predictive grading - I was embarrassed at his lack of intelligence. God help us if he is our Minister of Education. Thankfully, the ophthalmic surgeon put him in his place.

I.

The surgeon said that an exam should be held - no more than that. Easy words, but no explanation of how it might work or what the state of play is likely to be in August.

You make it sound like the surgeon won a debate using wonderfully fleshed out arguments. He didn't. He idealised it and said there should be an exam. Of course there should but things are a bit tricky.

And if the exams can't happen you'll be grappling with predictive results whether you want to or not. Byrne called for the cancellation of the JC three weeks before it happened. You can expect him to double his money shortly.

Rosita

[quote=

I could easily see them trying to get the (new) 6th and 3rd years back as near to normal dates as possible, and maybe delaying the other years a couple of weeks, even if things are fairly under control C-19 wise.
[/quote]

With social distancing requirements the next academic year will be a part-time operation. So it'll be dribs and drabs.

Shn99

Now a video spreading like wildfire on twitter which shows an apparent stakeholders zoom meeting being leaked. Students will have 0 motivation

km79

Shn99 wrote: »

Now a video spreading like wildfire on twitter which shows an apparent stakeholders zoom meeting being leaked. Students will have 0 motivation

What’s the gist of it

Mardy Bum

km79 wrote: »

What’s the gist of it

A guy saying politicians are in favour of PG.

mtoutlemonde

Rosita wrote: »

The surgeon said that an exam should be held - no more than that. Easy words, but no explanation of how it might work or what the state of play is likely to be in August.

You make it sound like the surgeon won a debate using wonderfully fleshed out arguments. He didn't. He idealised it and said there should be an exam. Of course there should but things are a bit tricky.

And if the exams can't happen you'll be grappling with predictive results whether you want to or not. Byrne called for the cancellation of the JC three weeks before it happened. You can expect him to double his money shortly.

That't not his field and not his problem - he just gave a few 'wake up to reality' statements and there was no response from Thomas Byrne - it made him look weak in my opinion. Thomas Byrne said no more than he did on the news on Sunday (I think) - he has said it so many times now he doesn't need a script.

The JC and LC are completely different - the now watered down JC is pointless and will not have any bearing on anyone's future (maybe a few), whereas the LC will decide what you do for the rest of your life e.g. further study/work.

brighterspark

randylonghorn wrote: »

Another good argument against that option ...

And even at that, Joe, achieved in the UK found only a 16% accuracy.

I could easily see them trying to get the (new) 6th and 3rd years back as near to normal dates as possible, and maybe delaying the other years a couple of weeks, even if things are fairly under control C-19 wise.

With a lot of teachers involved in correcting LC, assuming current plan sticks, it would ease the pressure a fair bit.

To use the Dr Gill Wyness report as evidence that predicted grades are inaccurate is not very applicable to our situation. It is important to understand the context of these predictions - they are used by third level institutes normally to give conditional (depends on final results) place offers. This therefore leaves teachers with the option of giving a precise prediction or the most optimistic one.
I have worked in the UK system and most teachers will go with the predicted result that is the most optimistic yet still realistic as it will ensure the student gets at least a chance to strive for the course of their choice and ability level. Non-securing of a conditional offer could demotivate a student and result in a poorer performance.
Considering what I have discussed above the report also states that the inaccuracies were usually in the range 1 or 2 points out of a possible total of 15 from 3 A level results – in other words not too far out! I therefore would contend that our system with 6 exams should also be able to produce predicted results that are fairly accurate. Interviews could be held to decide final places in high demand courses and the option to do a smaller scale leaving cert could also be put in place for the relatively small percentage that want to sit the exam.

Shn99

RTE 6 1 News are saying the TUI and ASTI are holding emergency meetings this evening

CrabRevolution

brighterspark wrote: »

To use the Dr Gill Wyness report as evidence that predicted grades are inaccurate is not very applicable to our situation. It is important to understand the context of these predictions - they are used by third level institutes normally to give conditional (depends on final results) place offers. This therefore leaves teachers with the option of giving a precise prediction or the most optimistic one.
I have worked in the UK system and most teachers will go with the predicted result that is the most optimistic yet still realistic as it will ensure the student gets at least a chance to strive for the course of their choice and ability level. Non-securing of a conditional offer could demotivate a student and result in a poorer performance.
Considering what I have discussed above the report also states that the inaccuracies were usually in the range 1 or 2 points out of a possible total of 15 from 3 A level results – in other words not too far out! I therefore would contend that our system with 6 exams should also be able to produce predicted results that are fairly accurate. Interviews could be held to decide final places in high demand courses and the option to do a smaller scale leaving cert could also be put in place for the relatively small percentage that want to sit the exam.

I'd imagine the higher stakes (i.e. the predicted grade is the final grade; no confirmatory exam like in the UK) in Ireland will result in even more overestimates than in the UK.

No matter how strong their integrity and honesty, I think every teacher tasked with picking their student's grades will know in the back of their head that by giving honest marks they could be condemning their entire class to not getting courses they deserve because there are teachers out there giving overinflated marks.

I can also see a lot of people choosing to do the LC exam if it becomes an option. They'll have nothing to lose as presumably they get to pick the better of the results (predicted vs. exam).

PG could get interesting going into the future. I can see enormous numbers of 500+ point students this year. I know this year they are only up against each other so it could cancel out. But say someone uses those points in a year or 2 when things are back to normal. With the inflated predicted grade, do they not have an advantage over those who sat the exam that year?

Also, 2 points out of 15 is a 13.3% error. That's a pretty enormous margin of error, especially for something as important as LC points.

Rosita

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

That't not his field and not his problem - he just gave a few 'wake up to reality' statements /QUOTE]

Exactly. It's not his field. Easy to prescribe when you will never have an irate on-looker jawing you to explain how it'll happen. The surgeon's input was minimal, a couple of sentences at most, and nobody was put in their place.

Rosita

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

That't not his field and not his problem - he just gave a few 'wake up to reality' statements and there was no response from Thomas Byrne - it made him look weak in my opinion.

Just for the benefit of anyone who didn't see this - Byrne was in his house on a video call and spoke for five minutes is so under questioning. The surgeon (Ml O'Keeffe) spoke about two sentences at the end of the programme in answer to a "and by the way what do you think?" type of question.

This poster is trying to imply there the was some kind of verbal interaction between them which saw Byrne silenced an account which is farcically inaccurate. I realise Byrne is a politician and therefore fair game in the eyes of many but at least let's be some way truthful.

Rosita

Shn99 wrote: »

RTE 6 1 News are saying the TUI and ASTI are holding emergency meetings this evening

They just need to calm down and wait until 29 July!!

Comer1

Rosita wrote: »

They just need to calm down and wait until 29 July!!

Surely you mean early June, you can't expect students to wait until the 29th of July to be told the LC is cancelled. That would be like a Monty Python sketch.

mtoutlemonde

Rosita wrote: »

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

That't not his field and not his problem - he just gave a few 'wake up to reality' statements /QUOTE]

Exactly. It's not his field. Easy to prescribe when you will never gave an irate on-looker jawing you to explain how it'll happen. The surgeon's input was minimal, a couple of sentences at most, and nobody was put in their place.

I agree - I just feel that he said more in two sentences than Thomas Byrne did in three/four minutes of ignorance. Maybe it was because I agree with him. I said earlier - this was my opinion which I am entitled to.

Rosita wrote: »

Just for the benefit of anyone who didn't see this - Byrne was in his house on a video call and sole fro five minutes is so under questioning. The surgeon (Ml O'Keeffe) spoke about two sentences at the end of the programme in answer to a "and by the way what do you think?" type of question.

This poster is trying to imply there the was some kind of verbal interaction between them which is farcically inaccurate. I realise Byrne is a politician and therefore fair game in the eyes of many but at least let's be some way truthful.

There was no verbal interaction and I felt that Thomas Byrne looked weak when he didn't get an opportunity to answer what the surgeon said - maybe that is Ivan Yates fault. Again this is my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

Mr. Byrne is not a teacher so he does not know what he is talking about - like the majority of people who throw muck at teachers because they had a bad experience and that is why I agreed with the comments of the surgeon that some form of exam must happen.

Newbie20

Like many of you here I feel Predictive Grading would be a disaster. Teachers know exactly why it would be but people that aren’t teachers don’t seem to fully grasp why it would be such a difficult thing to have to do and how using previous grades is not fair (cheating in mocks, different standard of 5th Year exams etc). Not to mention students that changed levels after the mocks, they would have no previous grades in their new level.

Surely it would turn into a joke of epic proportions with the grind type schools potentially giving loads of high grades as they need them to attract future students.

I suppose we just have to wait approximately 4 weeks and we’ll have a good idea.

Rosita

Comer1 wrote: »

Surely you mean early June, you can't expect students to wait until the 29th of July to be told the LC is cancelled. That would be like a Monty Python sketch.

Yeah, that'd definitely be better alright.

Rosita

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

Mr. Byrne is not a teacher so he does not know what he is talking about

Then by precisely the same token neither does the surgeon. You can't have it both ways.