Predicted Grades Appeals

man_no_plan

The stats for this year are definitely out, I can't remember where I saw them.

There's no need for anyone to give students anything. They can log in to the portal tomorrow and see the estimated percentage mark awarded by the teacher alongside the calculated grade.

Newbie20

Amacca I agree completely with the vast majority of what you’re saying here. The media have so much to answer for between a lack of information / education and just downright trolling.

However I have to take issue with the “asked to grade on the basis of what a students best performance on the day would be” comment.
Were we not specifically asked NOT to do this? If my memory serves me right we were asked not to base it on a best case scenario. Now I agree with you that it is very difficult to predict either way but it just annoys me slightly that some teachers seem to have gone with grades that students probably wouldn’t get unless everything went their way when we were asked not to do this.

Smacruairi

Newbie20 wrote: »

Amacca I agree completely with the vast majority of what you’re saying here. The media have so much to answer for between a lack of information / education and just downright trolling.

However I have to take issue with the “asked to grade on the basis of what a students best performance on the day would be” comment.
Were we not specifically asked NOT to do this? If my memory serves me right we were asked not to base it on a best case scenario. Now I agree with you that it is very difficult to predict either way but it just annoys me slightly that some teachers seem to have gone with grades that students probably wouldn’t get unless everything went their way when we were asked not to do this.

I agree, however there are students who might have cracked under pressure too,or who would have struggled to maintain the 2 week intensity. Do you predict who will fall by the wayside? You can only base your decision on the work that they have submitted to you, in various circumstances. For some that's best day, for some there would have been mocks done under real life settings.

The whole thing was ill-judged.

RealJohn

Newbie20 wrote: »

However I have to take issue with the “asked to grade on the basis of what a students best performance on the day would be” comment.
Were we not specifically asked NOT to do this? If my memory serves me right we were asked not to base it on a best case scenario. Now I agree with you that it is very difficult to predict either way but it just annoys me slightly that some teachers seem to have gone with grades that students probably wouldn’t get unless everything went their way when we were asked not to do this.

Yeah, this is correct. We were asked to grade them based on what we thought their most likely result would be, not their best case scenario.
Many teachers didn't follow this instruction, but that was the instruction.

Millionaire only not

Everyone is looking for how they would have performed if they had access to the paper the day before the exam !

PhilOssophy

Thread is too long but the Department Of Ed should just tell everybody who isn't happy with their result to sit the exam in November and prove it

Smacruairi

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Thread is too long but the Department Of Ed should just tell everybody who isn't happy with their result to sit the exam in November and prove it

Why didn't they tell them I'm July so.

Treppen

RealJohn wrote: »

Yeah, this is correct. We were asked to grade them based on what we thought their most likely result would be, not their best case scenario.
Many teachers didn't follow this instruction, but that was the instruction.

There were many instructions. Initially the exact words we were also told were "on their best day".... Then a couple of days later there was a big backtrack , and we were told to ignore that, and just say what we'd think they'd get, like we had a time machine for alternate realities.

But screw it, it stank from the start so no point in blaming teachers. I think the vast majority of teachers tried to do right by their students.
The Department didn't exactly cover themselves in glory either when it came to following instruction... e.g. by hook or by crook and " students will only see their teachers grade on appeal", not to mention the ranking being released. And Now trying to vilify fee charging schools as the whipping boy because inverted snobbery and schadenfreude is popular.

The narrative being constructed now is surrounding changing the leaving cert because it causes social inequality. Before we know it we'll have academic tracking in every school with leaving cert CBAs and more practical work along the way.

Treppen

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Thread is too long but the Department Of Ed should just tell everybody who isn't happy with their result to sit the exam in November and prove it

That really is a poor show on behalf of students who got genuinely shafted.

I'd like to think that there are very few teachers who would be thinking that about any student of theirs, especially the ones who got bumped down because of a computer algorithm that ignored the teacher's professional opinion.

Sure, there were and always will be the students who think they're are above their standard, but from what I'm hearing from teachers, students and parents there is something rotten in the state of Denmark.

rainbowtrout

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Thread is too long but the Department Of Ed should just tell everybody who isn't happy with their result to sit the exam in November and prove it

Very easy to say that, but even the exams being offered in November aren't what would have been offered originally, with the exception of a few subjects it's 100% exam. So no orals, no music performance, no practical project in construction or engineering, no project in history or geography, no drawing in art. Students signed up to the exams on the understanding that they would be assessed on that basis. Now they are told they are not. With some of those subjects offering up to 50% for the practical component, which would have been taken into account in the predicted grade by the teacher, it would be hard in a lot of cases to improve a grade in November on a 100% written exam for many subjects.

zetor 4911

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Very easy to say that, but even the exams being offered in November aren't what would have been offered originally, with the exception of a few subjects it's 100% exam. So no orals, no music performance, no practical project in construction or engineering, no project in history or geography, no drawing in art. Students signed up to the exams on the understanding that they would be assessed on that basis. Now they are told they are not. With some of those subjects offering up to 50% for the practical component, which would have been taken into account in the predicted grade by the teacher, it would be hard in a lot of cases to improve a grade in November on a 100% written exam for many subjects.

Does anyone know in technology and computer science were the leaving cert projects assessed by the teachers as part of the estimated grades.

rainbowtrout

zetor 4911 wrote: »

Does anyone know in technology and computer science were the leaving cert projects assessed by the teachers as part of the estimated grades.

Teachers were supposed to give an overall grade which would take into account all the components of a subject.

Millionaire only not

Smacruairi wrote: »

Why didn't they tell them I'm July so.

Because they were giving predicted grades as the students/ parents demanded it .

PhilOssophy

I'm sick of the whinging about this. Everybody involved from from the minute they were starting whinging and lobbying for the leaving cert to be cancelled that this row was inevitable. Once they got their way on that, they are now not happy and are whinging about how unfair the system which they lobbied for is.
Tough s1ht to anybody who lost out but life isn't always fair and everybody can't get everything they want all of the time.
It was the ultimate cave in by FG and should never have happened.

Smacruairi

Millionaire only not wrote: »

Because they were giving predicted grades as the students/ parents demanded it .

That was all done and dusted by June though?

RealJohn

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I'm sick of the whinging about this. Everybody involved from from the minute they were starting whinging and lobbying for the leaving cert to be cancelled that this row was inevitable. Once they got their way on that, they are now not happy and are whinging about how unfair the system which they lobbied for is.
Tough s1ht to anybody who lost out but life isn't always fair and everybody can't get everything they want all of the time.
It was the ultimate cave in by FG and should never have happened.

I agree with most of this, but not everyone who lost out was lobbying to have the exams cancelled. Many of them listened to Leo saying that the exams would go ahead “by hook or by crook”, and thought “grand - let the lazy kids waste their time lobbying, but I’ll study and be ready for the exams”. You didn’t hear from them because you don’t hear from people who are happy with the status quo.

Personally, I believe only a minority wanted the exams cancelled in any group. Most of the people who were silent were silent because they didn’t think there was any chance the exams would be cancelled, and until they were, Leo gave them every reason to believe that.

That being the case (which is not a fact, but it is my belief), “tough sh1t to anybody who lost out” isn’t good enough. Even if it was a majority of students who wanted it, since when should students make the decisions about what’s best for them? They don’t have the knowledge, experience, or expertise. Neither do most of the parents. The ones who did, the teachers, were definitely against this. The politicians caved against the wishes of those who knew best.

Blaming students, even if they did want this, is not good enough. It shouldn’t have been their decision.

PhilOssophy

RealJohn wrote: »

I agree with most of this, but not everyone who lost out was lobbying to have the exams cancelled. Many of them listened to Leo saying that the exams would go ahead “by hook or by crook”, and thought “grand - let the lazy kids waste their time lobbying, but I’ll study and be ready for the exams”. You didn’t hear from them because you don’t hear from people who are happy with the status quo.

Personally, I believe only a minority wanted the exams cancelled in any group. Most of the people who were silent were silent because they didn’t think there was any chance the exams would be cancelled, and until they were, Leo gave them every reason to believe that.

That being the case (which is not a fact, but it is my belief), “tough sh1t to anybody who lost out” isn’t good enough. Even if it was a majority of students who wanted it, since when should students make the decisions about what’s best for them? They don’t have the knowledge, experience, or expertise. Neither do most of the parents. The ones who did, the teachers, were definitely against this. The politicians caved against the wishes of those who knew best.

Blaming students, even if they did want this, is not good enough. It shouldn’t have been their decision.

I agree, it should never have been their decision. But what do these protesting students want now? The govt to just say "OK here's your higher grade", or what exactly are their complaints about?

I agree a small (but very vocal minority) got the LC cancelled. But then, if people don't want something it is their duty to stand up and say "no it shouldn't be". It is too late complaining after the fact. It is typical of Irish society in general, a small few dissenting voices hold great power and its up to people to stand up and say no.

I think overall, everybody is partly to blame but I still think FG caused this fiasco and left FF (who I am no fan of) to take the blame.

RealJohn

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I agree, it should never have been their decision. But what do these protesting students want now? The govt to just say "OK here's your higher grade", or what exactly are their complaints about?

Well I do feel that as teachers, our role is still to advocate for our students. That’s part of the problem with forcing us to give them marks.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I agree a small (but very vocal minority) got the LC cancelled. But then, if people don't want something it is their duty to stand up and say "no it shouldn't be". It is too late complaining after the fact. It is typical of Irish society in general, a small few dissenting voices hold great power and its up to people to stand up and say no.

No argument on that one, except to say that if you let students make decisions they’re not equipped to make, you can’t blame them for making the wrong decision. It’s like the age of consent. If you’re too young to consent, and you think you did consent, that doesn’t mean you’re to blame for what happens. Same goes for this: the students had no business making this decision and they can’t really be held responsible for it. The adults can though.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I think overall, everybody is partly to blame but I still think FG caused this fiasco and left FF (who I am no fan of) to take the blame.

I’m no fan of FG, but they’ve played this beautifully. They made all of the popular decisions, and then left FF to pick up the pieces when it all fell apart.

shesty

Well you do have to remember that FG were never going to be in Government for long, that decision was already made.

I find it interesting that most of the comment around the exam results is focused on the so-called "algorithm" and its effects, and not the actual grades awarded by the teachers themselves, which is what the initial fear was -that teachers would be accused of intentionally failing students or otherwise.

It also seems to have very quickly quietened down since the CAO points were released though.

screamer

Look, if you give teachers free reign to award their students, a lot of them will go for broke and award them high grades, especially teachers whose track record determines how much their school can charge........ its human nature. If people are so upset about their awarded marks and want to prove they can do better, just repeat. It’s one year out of their lives to get what they really want for the rest of their life, and a small sacrifice if they really feel they can get their course of choice on the basis of their real ability....... otherwise, stop whinging.

PhilOssophy

RealJohn, I agree with everything you said above. There was no easy answer, but I definitely feel the govt took the easiest option initially and legged it and it has left a load of knock-on effects.

Treppen

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I agree, it should never have been their decision. But what do these protesting students want now? The govt to just say "OK here's your higher grade", or what exactly are their complaints about?

I agree a small (but very vocal minority) got the LC cancelled. But then, if people don't want something it is their duty to stand up and say "no it shouldn't be". It is too late complaining after the fact. It is typical of Irish society in general, a small few dissenting voices hold great power and its up to people to stand up and say no.

I think overall, everybody is partly to blame but I still think FG caused this fiasco and left FF (who I am no fan of) to take the blame.

You're conflating the request to have predicted grades with an error in the grading process as being the same cohort complaining.

Btw it wasn't all students asking for the LC to be cancelled, it was a random Facebook survey filled in by anyone but started by a student.

Treppen

screamer wrote: »

Look, if you give teachers free reign to award their students, a lot of them will go for broke and award them high grades, especially teachers whose track record determines how much their school can charge........ its human nature. If people are so upset about their awarded marks and want to prove they can do better, just repeat. It’s one year out of their lives to get what they really want for the rest of their life, and a small sacrifice if they really feel they can get their course of choice on the basis of their real ability....... otherwise, stop whinging.

Telling students who studied their assess off to stop whinging is really odd. Especially from a Joe soap who isn't involved in education. Every process has a grievance appeal structure, whether it's workplace, exams or medical etc.

I've heard of cases in non fee charging schools who got bumped down for no reason, (and the ranking untouched) so the new inverted snobbery of polarisation to virtue signal is just weak and an attempt to avoid the issue at hand.

Smacruairi

Treppen wrote: »

You're conflating the request to have predicted grades with an error in the grading process as being the same cohort complaining.

Btw it wasn't all students asking for the LC to be cancelled, it was a random Facebook survey filled in by anyone but started by a student.

Ah it was more than that. Where is that student union that was pushed to the fore out of nowhere? Your Thomas Byrnes and Ciara Kellys etc. The fact that the unions were completely ignored, tried tu save so much pain, and you'll still have "bloody teachers unions", even from its own members, just is galling.

RealJohn

Smacruairi wrote: »

Ah it was more than that. Where is that student union that was pushed to the fore out of nowhere? Your Thomas Byrnes and Ciara Kellys etc. The fact that the unions were completely ignored, tried tu save so much pain, and you'll still have "bloody teachers unions", even from its own members, just is galling.

The unions should have protected us from this. They were willing to send us out on strike, costing us money, and still ultimately folding on the CBA issue (it doesn't matter that it's not for state certification, yet - it's the thin end of the wedge), but they didn't even suggest doing so over predicted grades. They didn't even put it to a vote. They just accepted it.

At least CBAs, if they'd been for official certification, would have had specific marking schemes and, presumably, external monitoring on some level, even if it was just that the odd one had to be sent off to Athlone, and all of this for a low stakes certification. Invented grades was the same thing, except that instead of having something clear and set, the teachers here has to invent grades based on their own opinions, for the most high stakes exam they're involved in, leaving them completely open to accusations of favouritism, bias, and power tripping.

Invented grades is everything we went on strike to avoid, times 1000, and the unions barely made a peep. The only thing that keeps me in the union is fear that I might need their protection someday. They've been worse than useless on this.

Smacruairi

RealJohn wrote: »

The unions should have protected us from this. They were willing to send us out on strike, costing us money, and still ultimately folding on the CBA issue (it doesn't matter that it's not for state certification, yet - it's the thin end of the wedge), but they didn't even suggest doing so over predicted grades. They didn't even put it to a vote. They just accepted it.

At least CBAs, if they'd been for official certification, would have had specific marking schemes and, presumably, external monitoring on some level, even if it was just that the odd one had to be sent off to Athlone, and all of this for a low stakes certification. Invented grades was the same thing, except that instead of having something clear and set, the teachers here has to invent grades based on their own opinions, for the most high stakes exam they're involved in, leaving them completely open to accusations of favouritism, bias, and power tripping.

Invented grades is everything we went on strike to avoid, times 1000, and the unions barely made a peep. The only thing that keeps me in the union is fear that I might need their protection someday. They've been worse than useless on this.

What could they have done though? Can't strike in the middle of a pandemic, when we are not even in the building anyway, that's just saving money for the govt. They highlighted the inadequacies serveral hundred times, and were ignored because "mental wellbeing" and all that bollix.

Don't get me wrong, the leadership is a bit shambolic, and I'd love them to use this period of us in the building to now push for pay equality, as we have been now told that we can basically crash the economy at will if we don't go in, but I dunt blame them for make up grades. We are protected in so far as they ensured we couldn't get sued for our professional opinion, that had to be highlighted at the start, abs you can already see the media narrative "teachers too generous... Not professional" etc being bandied about to save FG blushes.

I do blame them for having a bit of a closed shop whereby the only way you can actually advance in the union is 7 years of pandering to the person above you, just like Irish politics. But that's a whole other issue.

RealJohn

Smacruairi wrote: »

What could they have done though? Can't strike in the middle of a pandemic, when we are not even in the building anyway,

We didn’t have to strike. We just had to say “No, we won’t do that. Find another way.”
If they tried to threaten us on that in any way, then we could threaten not to reopen. Granted, they had the summer to threaten us, but there were counter threats to that too.
We were in a position to say no, if the unions had even tried to fight it, but they didn’t.

Smacruairi wrote: »

... and I'd love them to use this period of us in the building to now push for pay equality,

And they could have used this as a bargaining chip for that, but they didn’t, so they didn’t even make the best of a bad lot.

Smacruairi wrote: »

We are protected in so far as they ensured we couldn't get sued for our professional opinion,

That remains to be seen. We can definitely be sued anyway. Our “protection” is that it won’t come out of our own pockets if we are, but I’m not even totally convinced of that.

Smacruairi

RealJohn wrote: »

We didn’t have to strike. We just had to say “No, we won’t do that. Find another way.”
If they tried to threaten us on that in any way, then we could threaten not to reopen. Granted, they had the summer to threaten us, but there were counter threats to that too.
We were in a position to say no, if the unions had even tried to fight it, but they didn’t.


And they could have used this as a bargaining chip for that, but they didn’t, so they didn’t even make the best of a bad lot.


That remains to be seen. We can definitely be sued anyway. Our “protection” is that it won’t come out of our own pockets if we are, but I’m not even totally convinced of that.

Threaten not to reopen? Nah, that wouldn't have washed at all I'm afraid, especially after being closed for 2 months. And no, an individual teacher can't be sued.

RealJohn

Smacruairi wrote: »

Threaten not to reopen? Nah, that wouldn't have washed at all I'm afraid, especially after being closed for 2 months. And no, an individual teacher can't be sued.

That remains to be seen, but I’m not aware of anything that prevents a student or parent taking a civil case against a teacher.
And you say “closed for two months” as if we had two months off. The building was closed to students. School was very much in session.

TheValeyard

RealJohn wrote: »

That remains to be seen, but I’m not aware of anything that prevents a student or parent taking a civil case against a teacher.
And you say “closed for two months” as if we had two months off. The building was closed to students. School was very much in session.

Pretty sure the govt brought in an indemnity clause to stop that because of the unique case this year.