Teacher unions and exams - what’s the problem?

Gloomtastic!

Can someone please explain to me why the comrades in the teacher unions are so opposed to exam reform?

My first instinct would be due to money but is there so much money to be made that all reform must be resisted?

Are there other reasons?

Ah it was handy out the way it was, though. Striiiiiike!!!

History Queen

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me why the comrades in the teacher unions are so opposed to exam reform?

My first instinct would be due to money but is there so much money to be made that all reform must be resisted?

Are there other reasons?

If you are referring to the current fiasco reform is not what is on the agenda.

Amirani

History Queen wrote: »

If you are referring to the current fiasco reform is not what is on the agenda.

They've resisted exam reform for years before Covid. Unwilling to discuss possibility of grading their own student under continuous assessment etc.

We'd be in a different place now if we had a less (single) exam-centric model. Most students have wanted a change for years too, but teachers unions have decided that "it's not in the students' best interest".

History Queen

Amirani wrote: »

They've resisted exam reform for years before Covid. Unwilling to discuss possibility of grading their own student under continuous assessment etc.

We'd be in a different place now if we had a less (single) exam-centric model. Most students have wanted a change for years too, but teachers unions have decided that "it's not in the students' best interest".

If you are aware of the mess made of junior cert reform you would be sceptical of it too. That being said LC reform consultation has happened I was at meetings about it myself. Being against a certain type of reform (eg. marking own students) doesn't mean you are against all reform. Most subjects are not down to one exam, in fact off the top of my head I can only think of English and Maths as being 100% exam based but maybe there are option subjects that also are. Most subjects have projects/practicals/orals and can vary between 20 and 50 per cent of the exam being done before the written exam.

blanch152

History Queen wrote: »

If you are aware of the mess made of junior cert reform you would be sceptical of it too. That being said LC reform consultation has happened I was at meetings about it myself. Being against a certain type of reform (eg. marking own students) doesn't mean you are against all reform. Most subjects are not down to one exam, in fact off the top of my head I can only think of English and Maths as being 100% exam based but maybe there are option subjects that also are. Most subjects have projects/practicals/orals and can vary between 20 and 50 per cent of the exam being done before the written exam.

Members of the teacher unions mark their own students at third-level. Why can't they do it at second-level?

I had to do "repeats" a few times in college because I had failed exams. This was an inconvenience, not an outright disaster that failing the leaving would be. Some lecturers marked harder than others in assignments and exams. Grade inflation is also a problem in third level.

I could go on, but it is sufficient to say that the Leaving Certificate and third level exams are a world apart, and neither are perfect.

I totally understand the ASTI not wanting to waste time talking to a Minister who clearly doesn't have a clue.

meeeeh

I think the problem is that in the main you are dealing with fairly conservative and very risk averse group. When you choose the profession you know fairly well what your career will be. There is uncertainty at the beginning but then teachers can assume approximate earnings, available promotions, career progression, pension, they know even when they will be taking their holidays. Nobody becomes teacher because of great pay, they are either passionate about teaching or they like the security and often both. I think they just have disproportionate amount of people who don't like change. It doesn't mean they are not good at what they do.

blanch152

Mila Quaint Book wrote: »

I had to do "repeats" a few times in college because I had failed exams. This was an inconvenience, not an outright disaster that failing the leaving would be. Some lecturers marked harder than others in assignments and exams. Grade inflation is also a problem in third level.

I could go on, but it is sufficient to say that the Leaving Certificate and third level exams are a world apart, and neither are perfect.

I totally understand the ASTI not wanting to waste time talking to a Minister who clearly doesn't have a clue.

Now, wait a minute, are you implying that universities the world over, which operate under strict quality control regimes, are not marking their students properly, because it is being done by their own lecturers?

blanch152

meeeeh wrote: »

I think the problem is that in the main you are dealing with fairly conservative and very risk averse group. When you choose the profession you know fairly well what your career will be. There is uncertainty at the beginning but then teachers can assume approximate earnings, available promotions, career progression, pension, they know even when they will be taking their holidays. Nobody becomes teacher because of great pay, they are either passionate about teaching or they like the security and often both. I think they just have disproportionate amount of people who don't like change. It doesn't mean they are not good at what they do.

Furthermore, apart from a brief period in college, teachers have spent most of their life in a school environment.

History Queen

blanch152 wrote: »

Members of the teacher unions mark their own students at third-level. Why can't they do it at second-level?

Totally different system. You deal with children in second level and adults in third level. You also tend to have a different type of relationship.

Edit: I personally am against it at second level but I know some of my colleagues are open to the idea. I'm only speaking for myself.

doublejobbing 2

meeeeh wrote: »

I Nobody becomes teacher because of great pay, t.

Actually that's exactly why they become one. That and the holidays.

meeeeh

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

Actually that's exactly why they become one. That and the holidays.

You have potential of much better pay with similar level of education in less stable professions. Teaching has a scale which means pay will be relatively stable but nothing extraordinary either.

Ten of Swords

Mod

If this thread descends into teacher bashing it will be closed. Discuss it civilly or don't post

cruizer101

blanch152 wrote: »

Now, wait a minute, are you implying that universities the world over, which operate under strict quality control regimes, are not marking their students properly, because it is being done by their own lecturers?

There is definite inequality in it. For example in my class around 10% got 1.1 and it was that way in most courses in the college.
My mate in DCU said in his class and other classes he was aware of around 25-30% got 1.1.
That makes no sense, 30% should not be getting the highest grade, it in some ways devalues getting it for the students who actually deserve it, but also gives an unfair advantage to students from that college.
In the greater scheme of things it possibly doesn't matter too much as for next step in life, getting a job, you are more than just a grade.

However for the LC to college, you are just a grade and so it matters far more at second level than at third.

Also the relationship is completely different, you could have a kid who is a messer but is smart and could do very well in LC but if graded by teacher they might not do as well.
In college the lecturer possibly doesn't even know the student and you don't have messers as such because they just aren't in class.

meeeeh

History Queen wrote: »

Totally different system. You deal with children in second level and adults in third level. You also tend to have a different type of relationship.

Edit: I personally am against it at second level but I know some of my colleagues are open to the idea. I'm only speaking for myself.

I had continuous assessment from first class in primary school. It is different than assessment in third level where a lot more individual work is expected but it's not overly an issue. The relationship with teachers was fine and more dependant on personality of kids than their grades. Also teachers who were normally disliked were usually equally disliked by those with high and low grades.

BTW the continuous assessment was dropped for fist 3 years since I was in school. There are plenty of complaints that it's so much worse that it used to be and that some kids get into 4th class without proper knowledge.

Also considering different markings in different schools. As I said I was in different system so we picked high schools by grades in primary school. I went from being among top 20% to being average or even bellow average. But barely scraping trough in high school I went to had more prestige than top grades in another school. We also knew there was good chance we will perform well and better than other schools in state exams.

anais

The problem is last year. For predicted grades.... The teachers were promised the class order was confidential and wouldn't be published. It was. The junior cert was a stand alone exam for that cohort, but it was used to predict LC grades. Last year the mocks came into the equation. This year, some schools have already cancelled them. Last year most orals and practicals had been completed and the grades informed the predicted ones. This year's haven't been completed. For the inschool/sit down exam how can there be guaranteed equality for a standardis. ed , anonymous state exam and teacher led, unassured standardisation and subjective assessment by teachers in your own school. The two systems don't equate. It would lead to unfairness at a basic level and an unmitigated disaster at an extreme level. Already students are emailing teachers and asking them for favours. It's one or the other. Objective vs subjective. Too late for both.

Treppen

Amirani wrote: »

They've resisted exam reform for years before Covid. Unwilling to discuss possibility of grading their own student under continuous assessment etc.

We'd be in a different place now if we had a less (single) exam-centric model. Most students have wanted a change for years too, but teachers unions have decided that "it's not in the students' best interest".

Do you put any store in the Junior Cycle CBA grading?

Treppen

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me why the comrades in the teacher unions are so opposed to exam reform?

My first instinct would be due to money but is there so much money to be made that all reform must be resisted?

Are there other reasons?

How do you think the junior cycle reform has gone?

Ten of Swords

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Mod

If this thread descends into teacher bashing it will be closed. Discuss it civilly or don't post

Not arguing mod warnings but looking for clarity. Does this mean the thread can proceed so long as no one critices teachers or is there a specific line that crosses into teacher bashing?

History Queen

meeeeh wrote: »

I had continuous assessment from first class in primary school. It is different than assessment in third level where a lot more individual work is expected but it's not overly an issue. The relationship with teachers was fine and more dependant on personality of kids than their grades. Also teachers who were normally disliked were usually equally disliked by those with high and low grades.

BTW the continuous assessment was dropped for fist 3 years since I was in school. There are plenty of complaints that it's so much worse that it used to be and that some kids get into 4th class without proper knowledge.

Also considering different markings in different schools. As I said I was in different system so we picked high schools by grades in primary school. I went from being among top 20% to being average or even bellow average. But barely scraping trough in high school I went to had more prestige than top grades in another school. We also knew there was good chance we will perform well and better than other schools in state exams.

I'm not saying continuous assessment doesn't serve a purpose. I don't think teachers should be marking their own students. I think it should remain impartial as it is at the moment. It is one of the things about our system that is commendable.

I would hate to have primary school students or junior level at secondary assessed in the manner you describe, I also think it would be more stressful. I don't think students would like it at senior cycle level given that we had the ISSU complaining before Christmas about students being over assessed.

Mila Quaint Book

Mila Quaint Book wrote: »

I had to do "repeats" a few times in college because I had failed exams. This was an inconvenience, not an outright disaster that failing the leaving would be. Some lecturers marked harder than others in assignments and exams. Grade inflation is also a problem in third level.

I could go on, but it is sufficient to say that the Leaving Certificate and third level exams are a world apart, and neither are perfect.

I totally understand the ASTI not wanting to waste time talking to a Minister who clearly doesn't have a clue.

Meanwhile, thanks to a government that absolutely failed to plan and an intransigent union, 60,000 leaving cert students are going in to mid term not knowing what the **** is going on.

To call it shambolic, uncaring and immoral is an understatement.

Donald Trump

cruizer101 wrote: »

There is definite inequality in it. For example in my class around 10% got 1.1 and it was that way in most courses in the college.
My mate in DCU said in his class and other classes he was aware of around 25-30% got 1.1.
That makes no sense, 30% should not be getting the highest grade, it in some ways devalues getting it for the students who actually deserve it, but also gives an unfair advantage to students from that college.
In the greater scheme of things it possibly doesn't matter too much as for next step in life, getting a job, you are more than just a grade.

However for the LC to college, you are just a grade and so it matters far more at second level than at third.

Also the relationship is completely different, you could have a kid who is a messer but is smart and could do very well in LC but if graded by teacher they might not do as well.
In college the lecturer possibly doesn't even know the student and you don't have messers as such because they just aren't in class.

But what is the harm of DCU giving loads of "1.1"s?

suicide_circus

Even if teachers are right and the whole strategy is f*cked (which it probably is )it kinda feels like, from someone who has no dog in the fight, that this is the time to just grit your teeth and get on with things and keep the show on the road.

History Queen

suicide_circus wrote: »

Even if teachers are right and the whole strategy is f*cked (which it probably is )it kinda feels like, from someone who has no dog in the fight, that this is the time to just grit your teeth and get on with things and keep the show on the road.

I can see what you mean. That's essentially what we did last year and look at the mess we are in this year. The Department did zero to prepare a plan b for this year. Not a little bit, not a bad job. They did NOTHING. If this is let slide you'll have the same type of crap happening next year. If you look up #LC2022 on twitter or whatever social media you'll already see the beginnings of rumblings about them for next year.

Darc19

It's the ASTI, it's totally normal for the union to use and abuse leaving cert students to have a go at government and try and enrich themselves further as Europe's best paid teachers with longest holiday period.

Remember, the ASTI allow RETIRED teachers to vote on all industrial action.

Imagine decisions on your job being greatly influenced by people who have not been in the job for 20+ years!

suicide_circus

Listen any group making waves that could force the hand of government in some respect to end lockdown quicker is ok by me!

History Queen

Darc19 wrote: »

It's the ASTI, it's totally normal for the union to use and abuse leaving cert students to have a go at government and try and enrich themselves further as Europe's best paid teachers with longest holiday period.

Remember, the ASTI allow RETIRED teachers to vote on all industrial action.

Imagine decisions on your job being greatly influenced by people who have not been in the job for 20+ years!

Really looking forward to hearing how this is going to enrich the ASTI? I'm TUI.

Treppen

Donald Trump wrote: »

But what is the harm of DCU giving loads of "1.1"s?

100 Trillion Dollars sounds great... But not if you're in Zimbabwe

Treppen

Darc19 wrote: »

It's the ASTI, it's totally normal for the union to use and abuse leaving cert students to have a go at government and try and enrich themselves further as Europe's best paid teachers with longest holiday period.

Remember, the ASTI allow RETIRED teachers to vote on all industrial action.

Imagine decisions on your job being greatly influenced by people who have not been in the job for 20+ years!

Predicted grades only.
Exams only
Predicted grades and exams.

teachers will get paid the same regardless.

divillybit

Why can't they have an alternative leaving cert in the form of online open book exams done through Moodle or some similar platform?

Im doing a postgraduate diploma through distance learning and its how our exams have had to go ahead because we can't have them in exams halls. I think it's a great job.

We upload out typed answers into turnitin which checks that text hasn't been copied off the Internent. I've not heard anyone suggest this option yet but seems like a good alternative for the year that's in it.