The way forward for LC2021

Rosita

PoolDude wrote: »

You deleted the condition I included from what you quoted but essentially that would need to be negotiated if they are at the table but my question is why is the focus on not just next year but future years - are they protecting something they fear losing. Surely it’s a separate topic, I.e. leaving cert reform which government and academics have expressed is needed

So there's no 'guarantee' about next year then at all? Just a word - 'guarantee' - thrown in the move things on? Just LC reform which everybody outside anyone with direct experience of Post-Primary schools believe is needed.

You are right about one thing; it is indeed a separate topic. So it should be left separate.

Rosita

Just putting this up here for the record as some would pretend it was never said. Link is below.


Nphet: Not yet the time to consider reopening schools


THU, 11 FEB, 2021 - 20:51
NIAMH GRIFFIN, HEALTH CORRESPONDENT

It is not yet time to consider reopening schools and encouraging movement, Nphet warned even as they cautiously welcomed decreasing case numbers.

New modelling data shows that, while the daily case numbers dipped below 1,000 for the third time this week, the 14-day rate of infection is still four times what it was in early December, and about 100 times what it was in July.

Although the reopening of schools remains a priority, deputy chief medical officer Dr Ronan Glynn sounded a note of caution.

Asked why the caution, he said: “because we still have more people in hospital than at any point last year, still more people in critical care … We are still seeing a level of disease transmission in the community that is far too high for a million people to go back.”

Looking forward, he said if the reproduction-number stays low, Ireland is on track to have between 200 and 400 daily cases by the end of the month.

There is a 50% reduction in mobility rates linked to workplaces compared to a normal week.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40225289.html

Treppen

PoolDude wrote: »

Just reading ISSU statement and watching the video - ASTI are only stakeholder that has still not engaged directly with them or responded to their invitations

The ISSU position is clear, they want their members to have a choice between predicted grades or exams.

The ASTI position is clear, you cannot magic up a Leaving Cert grade without evidence. Some teachers can because they know the students so well. But Some teachers cannot.

Everyone went to the talks with the clear understanding that everything would be considered and discussed. When they got there the department would only discuss predicted grades and nothing else. If there is no movement on that then the only option was to leave because the agenda of the meeting had changed.

What the ISSU is asking their teachers to do is unethical and illogical, but hey, if everyone wants H1s then that shouldn't cause any problems right!

Maybe they're right though, just assign random grades and let the CAO, Joe Duffy and the courts sort it out.

PoolDude

Treppen wrote: »

The ISSU position is clear, they want their members to have a choice between predicted grades or exams.

The ASTI position is clear, you cannot magic up a Leaving Cert grade without evidence. Some teachers can because they know the students so well. But Some teachers cannot.

Everyone went to the talks with the clear understanding that everything would be considered and discussed. When they got there the department would only discuss predicted grades and nothing else. If there is no movement on that then the only option was to leave because the agenda of the meeting had changed.

What the ISSU is asking their teachers to do is unethical and illogical, but hey, if everyone wants H1s then that shouldn't cause any problems right!

Maybe they're right though, just assign random grades and let the CAO, Joe Duffy and the courts sort it out.

Look, I'm trying to be balanced here. My earlier comment on ASTI lady not being very good on Prime Time is clear to anyone who watches it in my opinion (and its only that). Equally, its not clear why they wouldn't at least respond to the ISSU and clearly state their position and listen to that union but then maybe its a practice to not engage any other union - I genuinely don't know but it looks like they aren't talking to the TUI here either where it might benefit putting a collective viewpoint together. I agree with your point on the Minister, equally disappointing - where was the advance planning when it was not something that hadn't happened before.

The TUI were just on Newstalk. He said they have the information and it is about how it is pieced together to provide the alternative solution. There teachers have been assessing the students.

That said he also said there position is that this solution is a back up if exams can't go ahead and they need it as a contingency for that scenario.

Net, that ultimately means both unions are effectively aligned to some extent and at odds with the Minister's narrative of giving options - todays meeting will be interesting then!

One area they are diverging is going back to school - TUI again said they are ok to go back the week of the 22nd or whenever is deemed safe and have already negotiated what is needed as part of getting the cohort coming in on the 22nd.

PoolDude

Rosita wrote: »

Just putting this up here for the record as some would pretend it was never said. Link is below.


Nphet: Not yet the time to consider reopening schools


THU, 11 FEB, 2021 - 20:51
NIAMH GRIFFIN, HEALTH CORRESPONDENT

It is not yet time to consider reopening schools and encouraging movement, Nphet warned even as they cautiously welcomed decreasing case numbers.

New modelling data shows that, while the daily case numbers dipped below 1,000 for the third time this week, the 14-day rate of infection is still four times what it was in early December, and about 100 times what it was in July.

Although the reopening of schools remains a priority, deputy chief medical officer Dr Ronan Glynn sounded a note of caution.

Asked why the caution, he said: “because we still have more people in hospital than at any point last year, still more people in critical care … We are still seeing a level of disease transmission in the community that is far too high for a million people to go back.”

Looking forward, he said if the reproduction-number stays low, Ireland is on track to have between 200 and 400 daily cases by the end of the month.

There is a 50% reduction in mobility rates linked to workplaces compared to a normal week.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40225289.html

So the key here is the timeline - he is referring to now and then talks about the rate at the end of the month. The question is do they feel that it is then safe at the end of the month if those rates are attained? I think that clarity is needed to enable planning of any phased return.

Wombatman

Treppen wrote: »

The ISSU position is clear, they want their members to have a choice between predicted grades or exams.

The ASTI position is clear, you cannot magic up a Leaving Cert grade without evidence. Some teachers can because they know the students so well. But Some teachers cannot.

Everyone went to the talks with the clear understanding that everything would be considered and discussed. When they got there the department would only discuss predicted grades and nothing else. If there is no movement on that then the only option was to leave because the agenda of the meeting had changed.

What the ISSU is asking their teachers to do is unethical and illogical, but hey, if everyone wants H1s then that shouldn't cause any problems right!

Maybe they're right though, just assign random grades and let the CAO, Joe Duffy and the courts sort it out.

https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2021/0211/1196583-leaving-cert/

Very much doubt <> impossible.

He said there is a lack of data available to teachers to undertake a Calculated Grades process this year, "the position is far worse than last year" and it is "very much in doubt if a credible Calculated Grade process could be achieved this year."

Extremely challenging <> impossible.

The union said that this year's lack of assessment data for students would make the delivery of a credible Calculated Grades process extremely challenging.

I wonder if the ASTI could be motivated by a carrot of some kind? Could even be angling for said carrot.

Wombatman

Rosita wrote: »

Just putting this up here for the record as some would pretend it was never said. Link is below.


Nphet: Not yet the time to consider reopening schools


THU, 11 FEB, 2021 - 20:51
NIAMH GRIFFIN, HEALTH CORRESPONDENT

It is not yet time to consider reopening schools and encouraging movement, Nphet warned even as they cautiously welcomed decreasing case numbers.

New modelling data shows that, while the daily case numbers dipped below 1,000 for the third time this week, the 14-day rate of infection is still four times what it was in early December, and about 100 times what it was in July.

Although the reopening of schools remains a priority, deputy chief medical officer Dr Ronan Glynn sounded a note of caution.

Asked why the caution, he said: “because we still have more people in hospital than at any point last year, still more people in critical care … We are still seeing a level of disease transmission in the community that is far too high for a million people to go back.”

Looking forward, he said if the reproduction-number stays low, Ireland is on track to have between 200 and 400 daily cases by the end of the month.

There is a 50% reduction in mobility rates linked to workplaces compared to a normal week.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40225289.html

Asked why the caution, he said: “because we still have more people in hospital than at any point last year, still more people in critical care … We are still seeing a level of disease transmission in the community that is far too high for a million people to go back.”

Is Glynn making a general statement here or a statement on schools specifically?

Rosita

PoolDude wrote: »

One area they are diverging is going back to school - TUI again said they are ok to go back the week of the 22nd or whenever is deemed safe and have already negotiated what is needed as part of getting the cohort coming in on the 22nd.

But there is no divergence. The TUI saying they are okay to go back "the week of the 22nd or whenever is deemed safe" is meaningless. It really just means that "we actually agree with the ASTI that schools and the general community spread should be considered safe before schools are open, which is what the second part of the statement is in fact saying but we'll throw in the first part with the date because that's what people will remember and we'll appear reasonable".

Bobtheman

Just listened to colm " I'm everywhere" o rourke on the radio rte. He is backing the Asti. Not that he really has a huge amount of influence except in his head.

History Queen

Bobtheman wrote: »

Just listened to colm " I'm everywhere" o rourke on the radio rte. He is backing the Asti. Not that he really has a huge amount of influence except in his head.

But him backing the ASTI is unusual. I think blame for this whole fiasco has to be left at the Department's door. They did no planning. None. And the sooner the general public realise that the better.

PoolDude

Rosita wrote: »

But there is no divergence. The TUI saying they are okay to go back "the week of the 22nd or whenever is deemed safe" is meaningless. It really just means that "we actually agree with the ASTI that schools and the general community spread should be considered safe before schools are open, which is what the second part of the statement is in fact saying but we'll throw in the first part with the date because that's what people will remember and we'll appear reasonable".

Well no, he was saying they have already agreed the requirements needed to go back and to the plan as part of the talks they've already had and that he wouldn't comment on the ASTI who have said the plan is not acceptable to them.

Rosita

PoolDude wrote: »

Well no, he was saying they have already agreed the requirements needed to go back and to the plan as part of the talks they've already had and that he wouldn't comment on the ASTI who have said the plan is not acceptable to them.

Why are the saying "when deemed safe" then...........if the requirements are already agreed?

History Queen

Rosita wrote: »

Why are the saying "when deemed safe" then...........if the requirements are already agreed?

I'll go look now but there was a quote from a Nephet member about it being safe to return up to 5% of the school population I think in some of the TUI stuff circulated to members last night. Not sure if there was anything for full return.

Found it:
"The Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health, on 22nd
January, clarified that a percentage of up to 5% of the national total school population
returning to on-site provision is an acceptable amount of movement in the population and
will not have any adverse impact on community transmission rates."

Taken from:
Framework Plan for phased return of post-primary school education appendix 1

Rosita

History Queen wrote: »

I'll go look now but there was a quote from a Nephet member about it being safe to return up to 5% of the school population I think in some of the TUI stuff circulated to members last night. Not sure if there was anything for full return.

Found it:
"The Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health, on 22nd
January, clarified that a percentage of up to 5% of the national total school population
returning to on-site provision is an acceptable amount of movement in the population and
will not have any adverse impact on community transmission rates."

Taken from:
Framework Plan for phased return of post-primary school education appendix 1

I'll ask the same question again - Why are they (the TUI) saying "when deemed safe" then...........if they believe and can show that requirements are already agreed?

History Queen

Rosita wrote: »

I'll ask the same question again - Why are they (the TUI) saying "when deemed safe" then...........if they believe and can show that requirements are already agreed?

I assumed that referred to cohorts outside the agreed special education cohort? I'm only guessing though I could be totally wrong.

Rosita

PoolDude wrote: »

The TUI were just on Newstalk. He said they have the information and it is about how it is pieced together to provide the alternative solution. There teachers have been assessing the students.

This is either absolute pointless drivel - a cyber equivalent of a paper never refusing ink and you are just typing stuff that comes into your head or it's really significant.

If it's the latter the TUI needs to publish details of this assessment right now. Maybe the ASTI teachers, and those real hardliners who are in no union, could adopt those independently examined assessments. Obviously all teachers assess students as a matter of routine but wouldn't consider short-term routine in-class testing to have longer-term significance.

But if TUI members are engaging in assessment practices that are long and thorough enough to be cited on radio as somehow relevant to the calculated grades debate it should be openly discussed and shared. Might be a solution to the lack of credible data many teachers suffer from.

And maybe the Minister might, at the same time, tell us who instructed the SEC to not advertise for Orals and Practicals examiners, when and why. Might give us some indication as to how long the government have known the LC was dust. Would be interesting to juxtapose the timeline of that with the Minister's determination to "hold the traditional LC".

Mardy Bum

Rosita wrote: »

This is either absolute pointless drivel - a cyber equivalent of a paper never refusing ink and you are just typing stuff that comes into your head or it's really significant.

If it's the latter the TUI needs to publish details of this assessment right now. Maybe the ASTI teachers, and those real hardliners who are in no union, could adopt those independently examined assessments. Obviously all teachers assess students as a matter of routine but wouldn't consider short-term routine in-class testing to have longer-term significance.

But if TUI members are engaging in assessment practices that are long and thorough enough to be cited on radio as somehow relevant to the calculated grades debate it should be openly discussed and shared. Might be a solution to the lack of credible data many teachers suffer from.

And maybe the Minister might, at the same time, tell us who instructed the SEC to not advertise for Orals and Practicals examiners, when and why. Might give us some indication as to how long the government have known the LC was dust. Would be interesting to juxtapose the timeline of that with the Minister's determination to "hold the traditional LC".

This same drivel was spouted last year by principals in print and on the radio: "This is all fine sure the teachers will have no bother". At the time this was lapped up, there was a desire to calm any nerves about a system that was the equivalent of drunken darts. Teachers are assessment experts seemed to be taken as fact.

I think the question of expertise is routinely cast aside in education. Some teachers through experience and advanced study may become expert educators in their subject. Lots will be proficient and a small handful will be sub-par. The focus on facilitation and "generic skills" has led to this anti intellectual approach.

From a quick perusal, there are no MSc. degrees in Assessment in Ireland. One in Cambridge and a few others across the UK. It is a small but highly complex and technical field, no PME would ever really gain the knowledge necessary when one considers all of the pointless modules involved (Hist of Ed) and experience alone is not enough either (it can serve only to confirm assumptions). The odd inservice provides advice on formative feedback but I have yet to attend inservice that has explained any of the science of summative assessment.

If I was taking guidance from someone which would have a huge impact on my future I would expect that they would be able to explain the basic science of the subject. I would suggest the vast majority of teachers are illiterate when it comes to this. It is no fault of the teacher either.

Personally, a lot of the literature regarding summative assessment is Latin to me. I much prefer feedback and advice and would never consider myself to be knowledgeable enough to provide a summative mark relating to 2 years of learning in 10% increments.

It is the work of the shaman not the teacher.

Bobtheman

Can anybody provide me for a link to this frame work document? The 2021 one?

PoolDude

Rosita wrote: »

This is either absolute pointless drivel - a cyber equivalent of a paper never refusing ink and you are just typing stuff that comes into your head or it's really significant.

If it's the latter the TUI needs to publish details of this assessment right now. Maybe the ASTI teachers, and those real hardliners who are in no union, could adopt those independently examined assessments. Obviously all teachers assess students as a matter of routine but wouldn't consider short-term routine in-class testing to have longer-term significance.

But if TUI members are engaging in assessment practices that are long and thorough enough to be cited on radio as somehow relevant to the calculated grades debate it should be openly discussed and shared. Might be a solution to the lack of credible data many teachers suffer from.

And maybe the Minister might, at the same time, tell us who instructed the SEC to not advertise for Orals and Practicals examiners, when and why. Might give us some indication as to how long the government have known the LC was dust. Would be interesting to juxtapose the timeline of that with the Minister's determination to "hold the traditional LC".

Please don't accuse me of 'just typing stuff that comes into your head'. I've been respectful of you, others and the discussion. Yes, I have expressed disappointment at the Unions and the Minister but not at posters or the Teachers or the students impacted. MODS - you can decide

This is what I believe he said on Newstalk - Pat Kenny show. It's likely on podcast if you want to listen and share your perspective if you think differently feel free to do so. Again as I posted, he was clear that TUI only see CG as the fall back with written exams the preference.

History Queen

Bobtheman wrote: »

Can anybody provide me for a link to this frame work document? The 2021 one?

I got it as a pdf through TUI app so can't link. Will see if can locate elsewhere.

History Queen

I've tried to attach file here Bobtheman

Rosita

PoolDude wrote: »

Please don't accuse me of 'just typing stuff that comes into your head'..

I didn't. I did what our students long for - I gave you choice. The benefit of the doubt option was to provide detail as to the nature of the assessments TUI teachers have carried out that was significant enough to be mentioned on the radio.

Wombatman

Rosita wrote: »

This is either absolute pointless drivel - a cyber equivalent of a paper never refusing ink and you are just typing stuff that comes into your head or it's really significant.

If it's the latter the TUI needs to publish details of this assessment right now. Maybe the ASTI teachers, and those real hardliners who are in no union, could adopt those independently examined assessments. Obviously all teachers assess students as a matter of routine but wouldn't consider short-term routine in-class testing to have longer-term significance.

But if TUI members are engaging in assessment practices that are long and thorough enough to be cited on radio as somehow relevant to the calculated grades debate it should be openly discussed and shared. Might be a solution to the lack of credible data many teachers suffer from.

It has been argued here that the department should have been prepared for all eventualities and were feckless not to have done so. Students were considering the possibility of calculated grades since September. I expect the teachers who have the required data considered the obvious likelihood of PGs and acted accordingly.

Bobtheman

Ah Wombatman.
Sure teachers did more assessments.
But they needed guidelines as assessments will vary between even within subject departments.
There was no template for an agreed assessment
No Slar meetings to make sure we all have the same quality assurance

Treppen

PoolDude wrote: »

Look, I'm trying to be balanced here. My earlier comment on ASTI lady not being very good on Prime Time is clear to anyone who watches it in my opinion (and its only that). Equally, its not clear why they wouldn't at least respond to the ISSU and clearly state their position and listen to that union but then maybe its a practice to not engage any other union - I genuinely don't know but it looks like they aren't talking to the TUI here either where it might benefit putting a collective viewpoint together. I agree with your point on the Minister, equally disappointing - where was the advance planning when it was not something that hadn't happened before.

The TUI were just on Newstalk. He said they have the information and it is about how it is pieced together to provide the alternative solution. There teachers have been assessing the students.

That said he also said there position is that this solution is a back up if exams can't go ahead and they need it as a contingency for that scenario.

Net, that ultimately means both unions are effectively aligned to some extent and at odds with the Minister's narrative of giving options - todays meeting will be interesting then!

One area they are diverging is going back to school - TUI again said they are ok to go back the week of the 22nd or whenever is deemed safe and have already negotiated what is needed as part of getting the cohort coming in on the 22nd.

That's a cop out, as usual they are letting the ASTI make the hard decisions and state it as it is.
The department's position ,as relayed to everyone yesterday by the ASTI is that the exams are NOT going ahead... no "if".

The department refused to discuss anything other than predicted grades.

Wombatman

Bobtheman wrote: »

Ah Wombatman.
Sure teachers did more assessments.
But they needed guidelines as assessments will vary between even within subject departments.
There was no template for an agreed assessment
No Slar meetings to make sure we all have the same quality assurance

What type of data was used to compile the grades last year? Would it be logical to conclude that the same type of data might be needed again this year? Some teachers did and feel they are in a good position now to make sound predictions \ calculations.

Treppen

PoolDude wrote: »

Again as I posted, he was clear that TUI only see CG as the fall back with written exams the preference.

This doesn't make any sense.

According to the ASTI the only way forward the Minister and her department would discuss was predicted grades.

This is 100% backed up by the fact that zero recruitment for exams has taken place... you can't do this in one or two weeks.

We know exams are the "preference", but that's neither here nor there, me winning the lotto is my preference , even though Ive never bought a ticket.

PoolDude

Treppen wrote: »

That's a cop out, as usual they are letting the ASTI make the hard decisions and state it as it is.
The department's position ,as relayed to everyone yesterday by the ASTI is that the exams are NOT going ahead... no "if".

The department refused to discuss anything other than predicted grades.

Good context/insight.

You'd imagine that they should have been discussing the exam paper format and the Oral/Practical plans as part of the parallel process. Students want choice but that includes written exams, Unions want written exams so it compounds the departments bad planning that they are not discussing that in the meetings. I would have envisaged 2 sub groups working on each parallel process and syncing to align them to the guiding principles agreed for the discussions.

What's you take on the fact that the talks have continued today and will do over the weekend (the Ministers statement). Surely what ever they come up with is pointless if one Union then has to buy in to the solutions they are now not part of?

Bobtheman

Could anyone explain how we can supposedly have all kids back in school by April But we can't hold exams in June??

Bobtheman

Wombatman wrote: »

What type of data was used to compile the grades last year? Would it be logical to conclude that the same type of data might be needed again this year? Some teachers did and feel they are in a good position now to make sound predictions \ calculations.

I assume you are not a teacher and I don't have the time to go over what occurred last year. If you were genuinely interested in education you'd know. But let's just say the word farce springs to mind. Adieu.

r93kaey5p2izun

I just listened back to the interview with Michael Gillespie there as I was surprised at what was reported here. Maybe I was listening to a different interview but he did not say calculated grades were an acceptable contingency, he did not talk about teachers engaging in additional assessment in preparation for predicted grades.

Treppen

PoolDude wrote: »

Good context/insight.

You'd imagine that they should have been discussing the exam paper format and the Oral/Practical plans as part of the parallel process. Students want choice but that includes written exams, Unions want written exams so it compounds the departments bad planning that they are not discussing that in the meetings. I would have envisaged 2 sub groups working on each parallel process and syncing to align them to the guiding principles agreed for the discussions.

What's you take on the fact that the talks have continued today and will do over the weekend (the Ministers statement). Surely what ever they come up with is pointless if one Union then has to buy in to the solutions they are now not part of?

The department are trying to ram things through under the guise of "talks" even Norma tried to claim she had spoken to all stakeholders before declaring schools reopen I'm January.

Typically when talks are called for its quite often the Union going in for hours stating their position while the department nod and pretend to take notes and nod, then leave and do whatever they want anyway, and then use the talks as a way of saying they consulted with all stakeholders.

But they backed the ASTI into a corner this time and Department expected to do the same and pronounce they had found a solution and make the usual garbled Friday pronouncement this evening. Best thing the ASTI could do was refuse to engage and not be used like they were in the past.

Now it's cards on the table time, the department have to admit that they never made any plans for any form of sat exams , which is why they are pushing the predicted grades only option. They'll have to come up with something fast. Remember , the students don't just want predicted grades... They want the option of sitting the exam too. They should also call on the minister and ask what plans have been or will be made.

Wombatman

Bobtheman wrote: »

I assume you are not a teacher and I don't have the time to go over what occurred last year. If you were genuinely interested in education you'd know. But let's just say the word farce springs to mind. Adieu.

Address the content of the post please. I know teachers compiled and ranked grades last year did they not?

If you are a teacher, you are not doing your profession any favours with the lazy post and the condescending tone.

Bobtheman

Wombatman wrote: »

Address the content of the post please. I know teachers compiled and ranked grades last year did they not?

If you are a teacher, you are not doing your profession any favours with the lazy post and the condescending tone.

I recall who you are now and I don't give a flying fxxx what you think. Blocking you now. Troll.

Treppen

Wombatman wrote: »

It has been argued here that the department should have been prepared for all eventualities and were feckless not to have done so. Students were considering the possibility of calculated grades since September. I expect the teachers who have the required data considered the obvious likelihood of PGs and acted accordingly.

Acted accordingly? Like how?

What do you mean by "required data"... Do you mean using a test done by students at home and extrapolating a 2:30hr exam Leaving Cert grade from it?
Do we mark students who were absent as a zero or 100% or class average!

Maybe your are asking what the difference between formative and summative assessment is. So I'll answer that.

Formative: you can use tests or even general class tasks as a teaching tool along the way.

Summative assessment: that's at the end, that's up to the student.

The two are not the same.

Mocks were handy last year though as it was under exam type conditions, but even then they can be used formatively before the real exam.
Hence why teachers can decide to give a really difficult exam for high achievement students to stress test them.
Or relatively easy exams for students who you need to give a bit of confidence to or consolidate certain parts of the course they have covered which might be more agreeable with ensuring a good grade.

Wombatman

Treppen wrote: »

Acted accordingly? Like how?

What do you mean by "required data"... Do you mean using a test done by students at home and extrapolating a 2:30hr exam Leaving Cert grade from it?
Do we mark students who were absent as a zero or 100% or class average!

Maybe your are asking what the difference between formative and summative assessment is. So I'll answer that.

Formative: you can use tests or even general class tasks as a teaching tool along the way.

Summative assessment: that's at the end, that's up to the student.

The two are not the same.

Mocks were handy last year though as it was under exam type conditions, but even then they can be used formatively before the real exam.
Hence why teachers can decide to give a really difficult exam for high achievement students to stress test them.
Or relatively easy exams for students who you need to give a bit of confidence to or consolidate certain parts of the course they have covered which might be more agreeable with ensuring a good grade.

Required data.......

Teachers were allowed to use a range of data in arriving at their mark, including coursework, end of term tests, mock exams, etc.

They were advised, however, to exercise caution with mock exam results because those results are not always reliable indicators of how a student will perform in the actual exams.

Teachers would also have taken into account a student’s general ability as well as their performance in class. They had quite an amount of leeway. The core driver was their "professional judgement"

https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1159267/

Bobtheman

Treppen wrote: »

Acted accordingly? Like how?

What do you mean by "required data"... Do you mean using a test done by students at home and extrapolating a 2:30hr exam Leaving Cert grade from it?
Do we mark students who were absent as a zero or 100% or class average!

Maybe your are asking what the difference between formative and summative assessment is. So I'll answer that.

Formative: you can use tests or even general class tasks as a teaching tool along the way.

Summative assessment: that's at the end, that's up to the student.

The two are not the same.

Mocks were handy last year though as it was under exam type conditions, but even then they can be used formatively before the real exam.
Hence why teachers can decide to give a really difficult exam for high achievement students to stress test them.
Or relatively easy exams for students who you need to give a bit of confidence to or consolidate certain parts of the course they have covered which might be more agreeable with ensuring a good grade.

Why do you bother with Wombat? Anybody involved in education knew about the farce last year.. This ain't citizen information or the department Web site.

Bobtheman

It has to be noted there are only two mock companies and most students knew what was coming up.

rainbowtrout

Wombatman wrote: »

It has been argued here that the department should have been prepared for all eventualities and were feckless not to have done so. Students were considering the possibility of calculated grades since September. I expect the teachers who have the required data considered the obvious likelihood of PGs and acted accordingly.

Hold on. The DES and the SEC run the Leaving Cert/LCA and Junior Cert. It was incumbent on them to have a plan in place in the event that we would miss a significant portion of school this year. They are responsible for assessment, not teachers.

You know something like:

Plan A - Best Case Scenario

Cases remain low, schools can remain open all year, exams can proceed as normal with some modifications perhaps to practicals - regarding number of people in a room at one time, e.g. for home ec, woodwork, metalwork etc.

Plan B

Schools open and shut for short periods, or there are regional lockdowns in some counties, or some individual schools have to close for two weeks due to a breakout. Perhaps some contingency planning if this happens around the time of practicals.


Plan C

National lockdown for short periods, e.g. max two weeks. Depending on the time of year contingency planning for completion of projects, practicals, orals. Consideration given to tweaking written papers. Potential to rearrange Easter holidays to coincide with lockdown if it happened in March/April to maximise class contact time.

Plan D - Where we are now

Prolonged national lockdown. Consideration given to time lost in classroom teaching. Orals to move online. Offer more options on written papers, or leave them as they are and do them on a 'best four out of five questions' etc.


Flag all plans well in advance to education sectors so principals, teachers and students know what may happen. Outline to schools what form of assessment should take place in the event that predicted grades become a factor in awarding LC grades this year. Provide standardisation. Make this known at a reasonable point in the school year so fairness can be achieved for students as much as is possible.


None of this has been done. They've had 7 months since last June to consider the fallout for this year.

Rosita

Wombatman wrote: »

Would it be logical to conclude that the same type of data might be needed again this year?

/QUOTE]

You have nailed in one. It is indeed logical to conclude that the same type of data might be needed again this year. It is not there. Last year I had four significant sets of challenging exam data for my LC HL class.

Conversely, this year, with an OL bordering FL class, with brutal attendance, I have one Fifth Year Christmas exam done before Covid with a few 'encouragement' 40 per cents in there. You could be an ASTI spokesperson.

rainbowtrout

You have nailed in one. It is indeed logical to conclude that the same type of data might be needed again this year. It is not there. Last year I had four significant sets of challenging exam data for my LC HL class.

Conversely, this year, with an OL bordering FL class, with brutal attendance, I have one Fifth Year Christmas exam done before Covid with a few 'encouragement' 40 per cents in there. You could be an ASTI spokesperson.

In my school (and I'm sure in others) we were told to give students every chance of doing an exam so there would be data there for them in the event of predicted grades. So if they were at home isolating, to email them the exam and they could do it at home. Already that raises issues. They got to sit the exam at home with access to their textbook and the internet and the rest sat it under my supervision at school. So there is a grade for them, but perhaps not one that is accurate reflection of their actual ability.

Some students are playing that game, and some are avoiding assessment at all, even in the last few weeks while everything is online figuring that a grade has to be submitted for them, can't give them zero just because they didn't sit an exam.

joebloggs32

Wombatman wrote: »

Address the content of the post please. I know teachers compiled and ranked grades last year did they not?

If you are a teacher, you are not doing your profession any favours with the lazy post and the condescending tone.

Last year we could arrive at a calculated grade that we could reasonably stand over as we had completed every step of the ususl leaving cert pathway right up to mid March.
Those students had for me in 5th year completed xmas and summer exams.
In sixth year had mini mocks, mocks and projects almost complete. One more week and they were ready for submission. From there out to the exams would have been revision.
I coiuld also include the countless essays handed in to me to go with all that information.

With all that information i spent about two weeks calculating grades and i must have nailed it as they all got the grade I gave them, bar one student who was later moved up by the review.

This years group.
5th year - xmas exams, summer was online, but the students had their books so not a real exam.
6th year, mini mocks.
Project....turned into a farce thanks to covid. Went on a field trip on a Friday, by monday half the class was out as close contacts. Tried to muddle through with half tbe class tuning in from home but its a mess at the moment and would be impossible right now to grade it.
No mocks to use as it stands also.
Essays, well considerably less than compared to last year also.

So, this year I could not confidently produce CALCULATED grades on the data available.
If it comes to it and there is no exams what I would be submitting is a PREDICTIVE grade....in other words guesswork.

Treppen

Wombatman wrote: »

Required data.......


https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1159267/

That was last year. No mocks have been done this year... The rest is formative assessment.

Treppen

joebloggs32 wrote: »

Last year we could arrive at a calculated grade that we could reasonably stand over as we had completed every step of the ususl leaving cert pathway right up to mid March.
Those students had for me in 5th year completed xmas and summer exams.
In sixth year had mini mocks, mocks and projects almost complete. One more week and they were ready for submission. From there out to the exams would have been revision.
I coiuld also include the countless essays handed in to me to go with all that information.

With all that information i spent about two weeks calculating grades and i must have nailed it as they all got the grade I gave them, bar one student who was later moved up by the review.

This years group.
5th year - xmas exams, summer was online, but the students had their books so not a real exam.
6th year, mini mocks.
Project....turned into a farce thanks to covid. Went on a field trip on a Friday, by monday half the class was out as close contacts. Tried to muddle through with half tbe class tuning in from home but its a mess at the moment and would be impossible right now to grade it.
No mocks to use as it stands also.
Essays, well considerably less than compared to last year also.

So, this year I could not confidently produce CALCULATED grades on the data available.
If it comes to it and there is no exams what I would be submitting is a PREDICTIVE grade....in other words guesswork.

I think we have to start calling them magic grades.

Or in international education research literature for years to come it'll be cited as "a little bit Irish grades"

PoolDude

Treppen wrote: »

I think we have to start calling them magic grades.

Or in international education research literature for years to come it'll be cited as "a little bit Irish grades"

Stick with PG - Predicted, Probable, Possible, Pandemic, Prophesied, Proposed, Planned or even Political :-) :-)„.
There’s one to suit everybody in the audience.

History Queen

:pac:

PoolDude wrote: »

Stick with PG - Predicted, Probable, Possible, Pandemic, Prophesied, Proposed, Planned or even Political :-) :-)„.
There’s one to suit everybody in the audience.

Pretend has to be in there somewhere surely? :pac::pac::pac:

Bobtheman

The mood music is turning against the Asti.
We know where this will probably lead
Get your favorite lubricant ready and assume the position...

Treppen

Bobtheman wrote: »

The mood music is turning against the Asti.
We know where this will probably lead
Get your favorite lubricant ready and assume the position...

Thankfully the ASTI leadership only need support from teachers to maintain their stance. They have that in spades.
I think people are realising the department have/had zero plans made for the leaving cert since last year. Dispute Micheáls pronouncement.

Bobtheman

The Asti has a long history of cave ins combined with
poor leadership.
This is slightly different in that it's not a pay issue.
Thus I'm not sure what instruments of torture can be wheeled out by the Department
.But they can turn the PR screws on the members. I don't have great faith in my fellow members most of whom could not be arsed to vote in the recent pay deal

Smacruairi

Nah, no superconventions this time around...

How those people weren't named, shamed, and posted in every teacher's group known to man is a mystery in itself.