Teacher unions and exams - what’s the problem?

FileNotFound

Smacruairi wrote: »

I could tell you, but you would melt into a puddle, couldn't have that.

I love how people claim rote learning is wrong.


Literally the basis for any medical doctor. Doctors literally mass learn knowledge and follow simple steps to get an end result. Not to insult any doctors but mass off by heart learning is literally what sets them apart from others.

So in my opinion LC as was is essential, always happy for more continuous assessment but the exam has a purpose.

khalessi

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

So what lines had you rote learned off for your first dates?!?!?

I turned up to a blind date once and the guy had 6 x4 note cards he referred to when stuck for a topic, weird.

wirelessdude01

khalessi wrote: »

I turned up to a blind date once and the guy had 6 x4 note cards he referred to when stuck for a topic, weird.

Are you sure you didn't turn up early for a date on a TV show and he was going through his cue cards!!!

khalessi

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Are you sure you didn't turn up early for a date on a TV show and he was going through his cue cards!!!

:pac::pac::pac:

As you can imagine it did not go smoothly as he was going through them under the table. It was hiarious.

conorhal

FileNotFound wrote: »

I love how people claim rote learning is wrong.


Literally the basis for any medical doctor. Doctors literally mass learn knowledge and follow simple steps to get an end result. Not to insult any doctors but mass off by heart learning is literally what sets them apart from others.

So in my opinion LC as was is essential, always happy for more continuous assessment but the exam has a purpose.

Rote learning trains the brain to retain.


My 80yr old Da: Can recite the poems he learned as a youth, large tracts of Shakespere and dozens of traditional songs at the drop of a hat.


Me trying to tell a joke I heard yesterday: '..and then he said cluck off! No, wait.. did I mention that the Irishman that walked into the bar had a chicken under his arm?....

Str8outtaWuhan

So true I see it with my own kids. They are not encouraged to rote learn the tables by teachers. I remember having to stand up and recite them on front of the class, Its almost instinctual when some one say 6 x 12 etc

meeeeh

Str8outtaWuhan wrote: »

So true I see it with my own kids. They are not encouraged to rote learn the tables by teachers. I remember having to stand up and recite them on front of the class, Its almost instinctual when some one say 6 x 12 etc

I remember having to learn tables. I was rubbish at it because I didn't practice enough and it took me a bit too long to recite them. The boy who was the best at it failed maths and had to repeat the year a few years later while those of us who actually understood the principles behind stiff we were learning did fine.

There is a place for rote learning and kids should learn tables (mine do) but let's not get too lyrical about it.

I had a retired English teacher filling in for our teacher when she had some operation. He was obsessed with rote learning and was going through encyclopaedia Britanica learning everything. He was around E at the time. Absolutely useless teacher, we had to recite everything from the Headway including instructions and were marked down for using synonyms. Nobody learned anything.

As it happens he was also allergic to certain surnames so he tested the same people repeatedly, ran out of space for grades in the student bookand stuck them in the section for maths grades.

Str8outtaWuhan

meeeeh wrote: »

I remember having to learn tables. I was rubbish at it because I didn't practice enough and it took me a bit too long to recite them. The boy who was the best at it failed maths and had to repeat the year a few years later while those of us who actually understood the principles behind stiff we were learning did fine.

There is a place for rote learning and kids should learn tables (mine do) but let's not get too lyrical about it.

It would literally take you years of study at post grad level to understand the principles behind numerical addition. Its a lot quicker to learn off the tables and trust that its true.

wirelessdude01

Str8outtaWuhan wrote: »

So true I see it with my own kids. They are not encouraged to rote learn the tables by teachers. I remember having to stand up and recite them on front of the class, Its almost instinctual when some one say 6 x 12 etc

Learning off tables is the quick and easy way to know them. Not exactly hard with so many rhymes and songs around them and also skip counting.

meeeeh

Str8outtaWuhan wrote: »

It would literally take you years of study at post grad level to understand the principles behind numerical addition. Its a lot quicker to learn off the tables and trust that its true.

English is not my first language, you know what I meant. I'm very well aware that post grad isn't exactly learning about formulas for area of a square. Or is that some form of mansplaining where you assume every one you are talking to is complete idiot?

Str8outtaWuhan

meeeeh wrote: »

English is not my first language, you know what I meant. I'm very well aware that post grad isn't exactly about learning about formulas for area of a square.

Actually I don't you claim you didn't learn tables by rote learning but rather by understanding? how is that quicker ?

Rote learning in maths or any other area of knowledge is the foundation on which you build any set of skills , it is the fuel on which the engine of critical and computational thinking runs. without them we are but cars without wheels.

meeeeh

Str8outtaWuhan wrote: »

Actually I don't you claim you didn't learn tables by rote learning but rather by understanding? how is that quicker ?

Rote learning in maths or any other area of knowledge is the foundation on which you build any set of skills , it is the fuel on which the engine of critical and computational thinking runs. without them we are but cars without wheels.

It's also a foundation for which you later use calculator when you are resolving more complex problems.

Smacruairi

meeeeh wrote: »

Or is that some form of mansplaining where you assume every one you are talking to is complete idiot?

Wow that took a turn very very quickly. Someone answered your question and applied it to the situation at hand - times tables. Relax?

There are some things you need deeply embedded by rote, I would classify tables and basic spelling rules in that. Some things you need to learn deeply but consciously rather than unconsciously - eg in maths, some formulae or device, in history some dates. Some things you need to learn off, but more a general gist and understanding - plot of a poem in English, how to do depreciation in accounting. There are different levels of having to learn something off, and yes it is an important skill, it's foolish to suggest either extreme.

meeeeh

Smacruairi wrote: »

Wow that took a turn very very quickly. Someone answered your question and applied it to the situation at hand - times tables. Relax?

There are some things you need deeply embedded by rote, I would classify tables and basic spelling rules in that. Some things you need to learn deeply but consciously rather than unconsciously - eg in maths, some formulae or device, in history some dates. Some things you need to learn off, but more a general gist and understanding - plot of a poem in English, how to do depreciation in accounting. There are different levels of having to learn something off, and yes it is an important skill, it's foolish to suggest either extreme.

I don't know what question I posed in my original post? It was clearly stated in my post that there is space for rote learning so I don't know why the need for additional lesson on it's usefulness?

BTW you can't be theatrical actor either without rote learning yet it's quite clear that you need more than that to be a half decent actor. Rote learning is the trade never the art.

FileNotFound

Smacruairi wrote: »

Wow that took a turn very very quickly. Someone answered your question and applied it to the situation at hand - times tables. Relax?

There are some things you need deeply embedded by rote, I would classify tables and basic spelling rules in that. Some things you need to learn deeply but consciously rather than unconsciously - eg in maths, some formulae or device, in history some dates. Some things you need to learn off, but more a general gist and understanding - plot of a poem in English, how to do depreciation in accounting. There are different levels of having to learn something off, and yes it is an important skill, it's foolish to suggest either extreme.

Somebody was losing their argument and got a bit touchy... You and your darned mansplaining - Hiilarious....

Treppen

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't know what question I posed in my original post? It was clearly stated in my post that there is space for rote learning so I don't know why the need for additional lesson on it's usefulness?

BTW you can't be theatrical actor either without rote learning yet it's quite clear that you need more than that to be a half decent actor. Rote learning is the trade never the art.

Hence why everyone doesn't get high grades in the Leaving cert, despite people claiming it's only a memory test. There's critical thinking in there too.
Of course all subjects are different.

meeeeh

Treppen wrote: »

[/b]

Hence why everyone doesn't get high grades in the Leaving cert, despite people claiming it's only a memory test. There's critical thinking in there too.
Of course all subjects are different.

Thank you very much. I haven't thought of that.

joseywhales

Rote learning has its place, temporarily until we get the opportunity to understand the subject at ever more fundamental levels. I found lc maths frustrating because of the volume of "questions" we had to practice having very little understanding of theory for example. Some of the theory, such as the earlier reference to addition, I believe is probably easier to understand as a 10 year old than it is for a 20 year old and I think it's a pity we don't get more of a flavour of pure mathematics in school. There is a breaking point with rote learning, where motivation wanes exponentially. By the time you get to university math, where you basically start again, you might be jaded with the subject.

irishproduce

Looks like they got this over the line.
TUI in news this morning saying they have concerns and want meetings. It's never ending with them

History Queen

irishproduce wrote: »

Looks like they got this over the line.
TUI in news this morning saying they have concerns and want meetings. It's never ending with them

Have you answers to their concerns? I don't see why you say it's "never ending with them". The Department made this mess.

meeeeh

Well they can go on and on discussing every issue Patsy on twitter has but at some stage you have to move on. Unions will never be happy anyway so they can skip another month of wasting time. In the end management decide and if Unions want to run schools by their rules then they should run in the election for the government.

wirelessdude01

irishproduce wrote: »

Looks like they got this over the line.
TUI in news this morning saying they have concerns and want meetings. It's never ending with them

Do you think their concerns are not valid?

I'm not a secondary teacher but even I can pick holes in this plan.

History Queen

meeeeh wrote: »

Well they can go on and on discussing every issue Patsy on twitter has but at some stage you have to move on. Unions will never be happy anyway so they skip another month of wasting time.

Jesus. Theses issues need to be sorted for the students. They literally cannot move on without sorting them. I'll give you one scenario; music teacher 20 students. 10 want predicted grades. 10 want to sit exam. Practical is worth 50% but only students sitting exam do practical. How much class time does he dedicate to the practical without favouring or disadvantaging either set of students?

meeeeh

History Queen wrote: »

Jesus. Theses issues need to be sorted for the students. They literally cannot move on without sorting them. I'll give you one scenario music teacher 20 students. 10 want predicted grades. 10 want to sit exam. Practical is worth 50% but only students sitting exam do practical. How much class time does he dedicate to the practical without favouring or disadvantaging either set of students?

And that's practical stuff that needs to be sorted out. However that can be done after you agree on basic shape. If you want your negotiation go on for another three months so every practical thing will be ironed out before final decision is made there will be no exam.

I'm in private sector and the most expensive or overrun projects are the ones where customer can't make a decision.

History Queen

meeeeh wrote: »

And that's practical stuff that needs to be sorted out. However that can be done after you agree on basic shape. If you want your negotiation go on for another three months so every practical thing will be ironed out before final decision is made there will be no exam.

So no solution then. Teachers are back teaching students Monday! Plans need to be overhauled. That takes time. There are dozens of issues like this. Teachers don't just wing it in the classroom. If these things aren't ironed out students lose out.

meeeeh

History Queen wrote: »

So no solution then. Teachers are back teaching students Monday! Plans need to be overhauled. That takes time. There are dozens of issues like this. Teachers don't just wing it in the classroom. If these things aren't ironed out students lose out.

Well considering you are not planning for 5 years in advance you will have to work under pressure. I can't give you a solution I don't work in the field. I don't know how to resolve your issues, it's up to you and your colleagues to resolve that.

History Queen

meeeeh wrote: »

Well considering you are not planning for 5 years in advance you will have to work under pressure. I can't give you a solution I don't work in the field. I don't know how to resolve your issues, it's up to you and your colleagues to resolve that.

Wrong. It's up to the Department to resolve as has to be a nationwide approach to ensure fairness. Our unions are pointing these issues out and are being criticised by people like you, who, as you said, don't work in the field, so therefor don't understand the issues. Why not ask what the issues are instead of immediately assuming the unions are at fault?

blanch152

History Queen wrote: »

Wrong. It's up to the Department to resolve as has to be a nationwide approach to ensure fairness. Our unions are pointing these issues out and are being criticised by people like you, who, as you said, don't work in the field, so therefor don't understand the issues. Why not ask what the issues are instead of immediately assuming the unions are at fault?

Last year the students got their predicted grade outcome before they sat the exams. This meant the pressure was only on them for the exams where they wanted an increase. As a result the average number of exams sat in November was two.

This year, the students, who have been even more disadvantaged, don't get that benefit, as the unions have blocked it.

History Queen

blanch152 wrote: »

Last year the students got their predicted grade outcome before they sat the exams. This meant the pressure was only on them for the exams where they wanted an increase. As a result the average number of exams sat in November was two.

This year, the students, who have been even more disadvantaged, don't get that benefit, as the unions have blocked it.

You're completely wrong. Students now have a no lose situation. They all get predicted grades anyway AND have the opportunity to sit the exam. The exam for the first time in history, is low stakes as they have a safety net of predicted grades. Or they can chose not to sit it at all and just take their predicted grades. The best grade of the two stands. It means all students can move on to third level or whatever their plan is in September instead of losing a year like last year's cohort.

meeeeh

History Queen wrote: »

Wrong. It's up to the Department to resolve as has to be a nationwide approach to ensure fairness. Our unions are pointing these issues out and are being criticised by people like you, who, as you said, don't work in the field, so therefor don't understand the issues. Why not ask what the issues are instead of immediately assuming the unions are at fault?

Nobody is saying there are no issues but at some stage you have to decide what way you are doing things and then resolve niggles. Two groups in the discussion seem to be happy two don't seem to be happy but however unhappy you feel about this you will be affected only one year your students will have to deal with consequences for years.