School reopenings -current plan WAS McHugh's plan

rainbowtrout

Finty Lemon wrote: »

He was progressive on the junior cycle.
And right about the need for higher maths in primary teachers.
Annoying teachers seems to be a hanging offence for some.

You say progressive, I say dumbed down.

I was chatting to my Leaving Certs about the new Junior Cert the other day, I showed them the maths and science papers and they were horrified at how dumbed down they are. One of those LC students said his sister in first (who I also teach) came home saying 'when are they going to stop teaching us primary school stuff?' She's bright and she's bored.

wirelessdude01

khalessi wrote: »

Another school closing St itas Special School Drogheda due to staff as close contacts. Wonder how long before they are told to reopen.

Seems that be with the blessing of public health.

ShamoBuc

Finty Lemon wrote: »

He was progressive on the junior cycle.
And right about the need for higher maths in primary teachers.
Annoying teachers seems to be a hanging offence for some.

Quinn was a joke, the definition of Anti Religion and the JC is as Dumbed down as you can get. Progressive should not be mixed up with changing and making a mess of. Total joke.

Icsics

Finty Lemon wrote: »

He was progressive on the junior cycle.
And right about the need for higher maths in primary teachers.
Annoying teachers seems to be a hanging offence for some.

The new JC is the biggest disaster to ever be inflicted on the Irish education system

Mardy Bum

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Quinn was a joke, the definition of Anti Religion and the JC is as Dumbed down as you can get. Progressive should not be mixed up with changing and making a mess of. Total joke.

It is much harder to achieve a HM and Distinction than it was previously (75+) at HL English.

Smacruairi

Mardy Bum wrote: »

It is much harder to achieve a HM and Distinction than it was previously (75+) at HL English.

Because the goal posts don't make sense.

Tick this box... Then this box.. Have a working knowledge of literature.. then REFERENCE 4 SOLILOQUYS' CONTRIBUTION TO THE THEME TO GET A DISTINCTION

they want to impose mediocrity on everyone and actually work against differentiation

Mardy Bum

Smacruairi wrote: »

Because the goal posts don't make sense.

Tick this box... Then this box.. Have a working knowledge of literature.. then REFERENCE 4 SOLILOQUYS' CONTRIBUTION TO THE THEME TO GET A DISTINCTION

they want to impose mediocrity on everyone and actually work against differentiation

The last literature question required students to comment on the artistic merit of the novel. This requires deep understanding and great teaching. It is not dumbed down. You are referencing a sample paper. The issue is the amount of content which teachers have struggled with.

History Queen

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The last literature question required students to comment on the artistic merit of the novel. This requires deep understanding and great teaching. It is not dumbed down. You are referencing a sample paper. The issue is the amount of content which teachers have struggled with.

The issue isn't the amount of content for me it's the inconsistency in how the content is assessed. It's the disparity of the standard. Tick box exercises next to questions that require very specific in depth knowledge. Large swaths of content that needs to be taught but may not actually appear on the test. The first year the new course was examined I calculated that I spent 26weeks working on content that was not assessed in the final exam (that 26 weeks is inclusive of 2 cbas just to be clear).

km79

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The last literature question required students to comment on the artistic merit of the novel. This requires deep understanding and great teaching. It is not dumbed down. You are referencing a sample paper. The issue is the amount of content which teachers have struggled with.

Science has 100% been dumbed down
It in no way shape or form prepares them for any of the Senior Cycle subjects. It also doesn’t cover many of the fundamentals of Science
The CBAs are a pure waste of time
They removed the practical examinable element to make way for them.
It’s all common level
So overall about 3 steps backwards and that’s being kind

Moody_mona

km79 wrote: »

Science has 100% been dumbed down
It in no way shape or form prepares them for any of the Senior Cycle subjects. It also doesn’t cover many of the fundamentals of Science
The CBAs are a pure waste of time
They removed the practical examinable element to make way for them.
It’s all common level
So overall about 3 steps backwards and that’s being kind

I agree with the majority of this. I think overall the content has been dumbed down but there are also more complicated topics added. For example students don't need to use the words ionic or covalent, but they do need to use activation energy, exothermic and endothermic. Doesn't make sense to me.
I like CBA 2. I think it's important for students to be able to research, cite and evaluate sources, so I do see the value in that.

r93kaey5p2izun

km79 wrote: »

Science has 100% been dumbed down
It in no way shape or form prepares them for any of the Senior Cycle subjects. It also doesn’t cover many of the fundamentals of Science
The CBAs are a pure waste of time
They removed the practical examinable element to make way for them.
It’s all common level
So overall about 3 steps backwards and that’s being kind

Overall, yes, I agree Science has been dumbed down. But I also think it has been made inaccessible to a huge cohort of students who did the old Ordinary Level paper. The failure rate has jumped significantly. Many students cannot engage with such a text-heavy paper. I feel the Science paper is something that stronger students with good literacy skills and good general knowledge could fly through with just a month of classes, while many others will never succeed at it regardless of how much they work and study in three years of Science lessons. It's the very worst type of assessment imo. Should these students be excluded from being able to demonstrate what they have learned in Science just because they fall below this "common" standard of terminal exam? Many of these students will still go on to study Science at LCA and in QQI courses like Hairdressing, Beauty, Sport etc. The new JC excludes them and demoralises them, while other assessment programmes still cater for them later on. To me that is senseless and far from what the JC should be aiming to achieve.

acequion

rainbowtrout wrote: »

You say progressive, I say dumbed down.

I was chatting to my Leaving Certs about the new Junior Cert the other day, I showed them the maths and science papers and they were horrified at how dumbed down they are. One of those LC students said his sister in first (who I also teach) came home saying 'when are they going to stop teaching us primary school stuff?' She's bright and she's bored.

Totally dumbed down and as they're all coming through to senior cycle we really are seeing the huge gaps. Unable to write an extended essay for senior English, it's not on the new "progressive" JC paper so loads of students not being taught that essential skill. Common level papers in other subjects causing huge dumbing down, boredom and switch off from the more able who then have to learn all the skills in 5th year.

Progressive my hat, edit very regressive but let's not spoil the narrative :rolleyes::rolleyes:

km79

Moody_mona wrote: »

I agree with the majority of this. I think overall the content has been dumbed down but there are also more complicated topics added. For example students don't need to use the words ionic or covalent, but they do need to use activation energy, exothermic and endothermic. Doesn't make sense to me.
I like CBA 2. I think it's important for students to be able to research, cite and evaluate sources, so I do see the value in that.

Mardy Bum

acequion wrote: »

Totally dumbed down and as they're all coming through to senior cycle we really are seeing the huge gaps. Unable to write an extended essay for senior English, it's not on the new "progressive" JC paper so loads of students not being taught that essential skill. Common level papers in other subjects causing huge dumbing down, boredom and switch off from the more able who then have to learn all the skills in 5th year.

Progressive my hat, edit very regressive but let's not spoil the narrative :rolleyes::rolleyes:

To be frank, if you are not teaching essay writing for CBA 2 that is a missed opportunity. A 40 mark question on a drama/poem/novel is also an essay in my book and this is on the exam.

rainbowtrout

Mardy Bum wrote: »

To be frank, if you are not teaching essay writing for CBA 2 that is a missed opportunity. A 40 mark question on a drama/poem/novel is also an essay in my book and this is on the exam.

Not an English teacher, but I would as a student have seen a massive difference between essay writing (which I hated) and answering questions on a drama/poem or novel (which I could tolerate).

Questions on drama/poem/novel are relatively structured. Students are asked to discuss a particular theme in the work and they use quotes or phrases to back up the points they are making etc. Even I know English teachers use PQE to help their students to structure answers.

An essay is a piece of original writing and they are given nothing more than a title to start with. They are not quoting, they are not assessing how a writer addresses the theme. There is a creativity to what they are doing. I would see them as two different writing skills.

rainbowtrout

acequion wrote: »

Totally dumbed down and as they're all coming through to senior cycle we really are seeing the huge gaps. Unable to write an extended essay for senior English, it's not on the new "progressive" JC paper so loads of students not being taught that essential skill. Common level papers in other subjects causing huge dumbing down, boredom and switch off from the more able who then have to learn all the skills in 5th year.

Progressive my hat, edit very regressive but let's not spoil the narrative :rolleyes::rolleyes:

The state of the new Junior Cert higher level maths paper :eek::eek::eek::eek:


Overall on the new JC, there seems to be a lot of tick the box type questions. God forbid a student might develop the basic skill of writing a sentence. :rolleyes:

Just having a look at the modern languages exams, granted I did French and German at school so I'm not coming from a base of nothing, but I'd be confident that I could pass JC Italian and Spanish given how many tick the box/true or false/ Match A to B type questions there are that can be guessed or worked out with little to no knowledge of the language.

Mardy Bum

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Not an English teacher, but I would as a student have seen a massive difference between essay writing (which I hated) and answering questions on a drama/poem or novel (which I could tolerate).

Questions on drama/poem/novel are relatively structured. Students are asked to discuss a particular theme in the work and they use quotes or phrases to back up the points they are making etc. Even I know English teachers use PQE to help their students to structure answers.

An essay is a piece of original writing and they are given nothing more than a title to start with. They are not quoting, they are not assessing how a writer addresses the theme. There is a creativity to what they are doing. I would see them as two different writing skills.

There are different kind of essays but they all set out to accomplish the same thing - make and develop an argument of some kind whether that is related to literature, global warming or a personal essay about your family. Every teacher should be teaching essay writing in relation to the content they are teaching.

acequion

Mardy Bum wrote: »

To be frank, if you are not teaching essay writing for CBA 2 that is a missed opportunity. A 40 mark question on a drama/poem/novel is also an essay in my book and this is on the exam.

Climb down off the high horse for a minute and maybe tone down the attitude of superiority regarding teachers' various methodologies.

The fact of the matter is there is no extended personal writing question on the new JC, yet the essay in the LC still commands the greatest amount of marks of any other question over the two papers. Yes, teachers can use the CBA as an opportunity to do this but it is not mandatory and not all teachers do it for all sorts of reasons. And even where they do kids are still not trained in how to do this in an exam setting.

So the reality on the ground is that you get lots of kids coming into 5th year unaware of how to write an extended well structured essay. This didn't happen when the old JC was in place because the course, while having its flaws, was a far better preparation for the current LC. Even the two paper set up of language and literature was so much closer to what they must prepare for in the LC.

Mardy Bum

acequion wrote: »

Climb down off the high horse for a minute and maybe tone down the attitude of superiority regarding teachers' various methodologies.

The fact of the matter is there is no extended personal writing question on the new JC, yet the essay in the LC still commands the greatest amount of marks of any other question over the two papers. Yes, teachers can use the CBA as an opportunity to do this but it is not mandatory and not all teachers do it for all sorts of reasons. And even where they do kids are still not trained in how to do this in an exam setting.

So the reality on the ground is that you get lots of kids coming into 5th year unaware of how to write an extended well structured essay. This didn't happen when the old JC was in place because the course, while having its flaws, was a far better preparation for the current LC. Even the two paper set up of language and literature was so much closer to what they must prepare for in the LC.

This is one of the learning outcomes and it most certainly is present- Engage in the writing process as a private, pleasurable and purposeful activity and using a
personal voice as their individual style is thoughtfully developed over the years.

Narrowing the discipline of English down to what may come up in a 2 hour SEC exam is foolhardy. The LO at least provide lots of scope for teachers. Mastering a well planned and implemented curriculum is a much better measure of student achievement than a two hour exam.

History Queen

Mardy Bum wrote: »

This is one of the learning outcomes and it most certainly is present- Engage in the writing process as a private, pleasurable and purposeful activity and using a
personal voice as their individual style is thoughtfully developed over the years.

Narrowing the discipline of English down to what may come up in a 2 hour SEC exam is foolhardy. The LO at least provide lots of scope for teachers. Mastering a well planned and implemented curriculum is a much better measure of student achievement than a two hour exam.

That, and most learning outcomes, in English anyway, are a load of ****e in my opinion.

"Private, pleasurable and purposeful activity"...writing....for the majority of teenagers.... what idiot worded that one? Seriously!

(Not criticising you Mardy Bum, you obviously enjoy the new course)

History Queen

Actually while I'm on a Junior Cycle rant... can the moron who decided to be all 'woke' and 'innovative' by deciding not to have a standard syllabus and instead 'allow' teachers to 'unpack' the curriculum... please promise me that you'll never ever ever ever ever ever....ever... go next nor near anything curriculum relatedever again. The sheer arrogance of it... as if I haven't enough to be doing....

CBA's... what a waste of time... not saying that some.of the activities aren't a good idea but they are not continuous assessment and are a load of ****e also. If you want JC students to practice oral skills do an interview/oral style exam like what happens in languages or LCA Engliah and Communications. And give it value!

Language. Language. LANGUAGE! It is never ok to tell a child that they are "yet to meet expectations ", to be frank, I'm not sure "in line with expectations" is a whole pile better.

The junior cycle as a whole is shambolic and I'll do my best to resist any attempt to replicate it at LC level.

I could go on, but this is completely off topic so I'll park it there.

Polka_Dot

Moody_mona wrote: »

I agree with the majority of this. I think overall the content has been dumbed down but there are also more complicated topics added. For example students don't need to use the words ionic or covalent, but they do need to use activation energy, exothermic and endothermic. Doesn't make sense to me.
I like CBA 2. I think it's important for students to be able to research, cite and evaluate sources, so I do see the value in that.

Completely agree. My first years can tell me what an induced pluripotent stem cell is, but can't give me a definition of an organ.

acequion

Mardy Bum wrote: »

This is one of the learning outcomes and it most certainly is present- Engage in the writing process as a private, pleasurable and purposeful activity and using a
personal voice as their individual style is thoughtfully developed over the years.

Narrowing the discipline of English down to what may come up in a 2 hour SEC exam is foolhardy. The LO at least provide lots of scope for teachers. Mastering a well planned and implemented curriculum is a much better measure of student achievement than a two hour exam.

You've obviously bought into all that jazz about learning outcomes and all the other hyperbolic buzz words and phrases used to brainwash us all into this.

Look if you're into it, good for you but I'm not and nor are many others by the looks of all the criticism. Some of the aspirations may have been good but it just hasn't stood up to its own test and has caused more problems than solutions. Problems that are only becoming apparent now that pretty much all the subjects are in and more kids have come through this new system. Like so much in education it was rammed in without being properly thought through and losing a lot of what might have been good in the process.

rainbowtrout

History Queen wrote: »

Actually while I'm on a Junior Cycle rant... can the moron who decided to be all 'woke' and 'innovative' by deciding not to have a standard syllabus and instead 'allow' teachers to 'unpack' the curriculum... please promise me that you'll never ever ever ever ever ever....ever... go next nor near anything curriculum relatedever again. The sheer arrogance of it... as if I haven't enough to be doing....

CBA's... what a waste of time... not saying that some.of the activities aren't a good idea but they are not continuous assessment and are a load of ****e also. If you want JC students to practice oral skills do an interview/oral style exam like what happens in languages or LCA Engliah and Communications. And give it value!

Language. Language. LANGUAGE! It is never ok to tell a child that they are "yet to meet expectations ", to be frank, I'm not sure "in line with expectations" is a whole pile better.

The junior cycle as a whole is shambolic and I'll do my best to resist any attempt to replicate it at LC level.

I could go on, but this is completely off topic so I'll park it there.

And I also think there's nothing wrong with the word fail. We can't all be experts at everything. I take on board the fact that for some kids school is incredibly hard, but yet to meet expectations means precisely nothing. I questioned this at one of our many inservices and the lackey hosting it said 'but they might meet expecations in the future', so I asked 'Is there an opportunity for them to repeat their second and third year CBAs, because to the best of my knowledge, nobody repeats third year, they just keep going'. I also said that some people will never meet expectations, and that it was ok to fail. If I sit my driving test, I get pass or fail. If I fail I don't get a driving licence. Same applies to everyone else and the world hasn't fallen apart when people are told they failed.

As for 'In line with expectations' what does it mean? If an A student gets an A then they are in line with expectations, but so is the D student who gets a D.

It's an absolute shambles.

History Queen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And I also think there's nothing wrong with the word fail. We can't all be experts at everything. I take on board the fact that for some kids school is incredibly hard, but yet to meet expectations means precisely nothing. I questioned this at one of our many inservices and the lackey hosting it said 'but they might meet expecations in the future', so I asked 'Is there an opportunity for them to repeat their second and third year CBAs, because to the best of my knowledge, nobody repeats third year, they just keep going'. I also said that some people will never meet expectations, and that it was ok to fail. If I sit my driving test, I get pass or fail. If I fail I don't get a driving licence. Same applies to everyone else and the world hasn't fallen apart when people are told they failed.

As for 'In line with expectations' what does it mean? If an A student gets an A then they are in line with expectations, but so is the D student who gets a D.

It's an absolute shambles.

Agree wholeheartedly... I said similar at my inservices and had the same argument about when they were going to allow students another opportunity to reach these "expectations". We can't use the word fail and then we wonder about resiliance? Failure and how to deal with it is a life skill.

rainbowtrout

Mardy Bum wrote: »

This is one of the learning outcomes and it most certainly is present- Engage in the writing process as a private, pleasurable and purposeful activity and using a
personal voice as their individual style is thoughtfully developed over the years.

.

That's a whole heap of bollocks thought up by someone who has never set foot in a classroom, or has spent the minimum amount of time there and has exited stage right fairly swiftly to take up a job in the NCCA or the Inspectorate.

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Narrowing the discipline of English down to what may come up in a 2 hour SEC exam is foolhardy. The LO at least provide lots of scope for teachers. Mastering a well planned and implemented curriculum is a much better measure of student achievement than a two hour exam.

Who is mastering it? The teacher or the students? How do you measure student achievement?

There is nothing well planned about the Junior Cycle, even the students doing the Junior Cycle can see that.

rainbowtrout

History Queen wrote: »

Agree wholeheartedly... I said similar at my inservices and had the same argument about when they were going to allow students another opportunity to reach these "expectations". We can't use the word fail and then we wonder about resiliance? Failure and how to deal with it is a life skill.

Partially achieved is another one that drives me cracked. More of the same rubbish.

amacca

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And I also think there's nothing wrong with the word fail. We can't all be experts at everything. I take on board the fact that for some kids school is incredibly hard, but yet to meet expectations means precisely nothing. I questioned this at one of our many inservices and the lackey hosting it said 'but they might meet expecations in the future', so I asked 'Is there an opportunity for them to repeat their second and third year CBAs, because to the best of my knowledge, nobody repeats third year, they just keep going'. I also said that some people will never meet expectations, and that it was ok to fail. If I sit my driving test, I get pass or fail. If I fail I don't get a driving licence. Same applies to everyone else and the world hasn't fallen apart when people are told they failed.

As for 'In line with expectations' what does it mean? If an A student gets an A then they are in line with expectations, but so is the D student who gets a D.

It's an absolute shambles.

Agreed, its complete bull****.

Just like associating the word reform with it.......imagine suggesting its an improvement over what came before.

In science anyway I maintain there was no great need for reforming that course, it was doing much less of a disservice to students than the new course....there are one or two things in the new course that could be included and you can see where they are trying to include overarching themes/patterns (like law of energy conservation, cycles etc) so its not without sime merit but overall iys a hot mess imo..........

They should call it the JC regression.....the latest the media are trumpeting about the LC being too narrow"
without examining any of the detail or the positives of having a narrow system the report mentions is a sure sign of more regression on the way because the powers that be want it that way....

History Queen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Partially achieved is another one that drives me cracked. More of the same rubbish.

Agreed. Using the word expectations has an almost begrudging air to it, as if even if they exceeded expectations you'd be surprised... (ok ok I'm nitpicking now but I still struggle to understand how anyone in their right mind could have designed this system of assessment with teenagers in mind)

Edit:just to make point clearer

r93kaey5p2izun

I think in some ways Yet to Meet Expectations is worse than just saying E or F or fail. You failed a set standard is one thing, but you may actually have met all reasonable expectations for you based on individual circumstances. Many of the children receiving YTME have surpassed personal expectations even if they fail. I hate that descriptor. And similarly with In Line With Expectations,many of those receiving it have surpassed (or in some cases failed to meet) reasonable expectations! I think measurement against a national standard is ok, but find the language used now inappropriate.