Major overhaul of LC curriculum planned

seamus

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=688770&issue_id=6881

Good news for people who don't 'suit' the leaving cert cycle. No use to those of us who have already done it, or who have started the cycle already

azezil

Well its about bloody time, basing how much you've learnd during your time in school on one exam is ludicrous imo.

One of the subjects i took for the LC included continous assessments and I got my highest mark in that subject. (Ag. Science)

Lanig123

Physics LC course badly needs an overhaul imo

spurious

The criminally neglected LCA needs to be updated and expanded.

TallGlass

Jaysis I would have done my 8 times over now, since the time this thread was started hahahaha.

spurious

Shows how quickly 'reform' comes in in Ireland. Unless it's money saving like the JC reforms, which get lashed in in a couple of years.

ignorance is strength

Lanig123 wrote: »

Physics LC course badly needs an overhaul imo

Anything in particular?

Corkgirl18

Lanig123 wrote: »

Physics LC course badly needs an overhaul imo

In what way do you think?

Practical elements as part of the final grade are currently being trialed for LC Physics.

judeboy101

CA has been proven to be a disaster at 2nd level, just look at our neighbours and how they are abandoning it in favour of our terminal system. By all means update the curricula but leave the assessment alone. Externally moderated, anonymous and virtually incorruptible, thats our current system. Stop making every student stay til 18, bring back intercert to weed out academic and channel non academic into trades etc. Keep the points system but adjust so that it reflects the course you want to do e.g business in uni needs A in LC etc. The abuse that goes on in the DARe and hear systems is enough to show that they are been used to slip in weak students to uni at the expense of stronger academic students. And please never make entry to 3rd require references or extra curricular or interviews.

ignorance is strength

Corkgirl18 wrote: »

In what way do you think?

Practical elements as part of the final grade are currently being trialed for LC Physics.

Not sure anything’s glaringly wrong. Bit predictable and exam questions are a bit bland, but those can be fixed without changing the curriculum. I’d favour either more technical riguour or broader questions that require more creative use of physics knowledge. But I think it’s generally fine.

judeboy101 wrote: »

CA has been proven to be a disaster at 2nd level, just look at our neighbours and how they are abandoning it in favour of our terminal system. By all means update the curricula but leave the assessment alone. Externally moderated, anonymous and virtually incorruptible, thats our current system. Stop making every student stay til 18, bring back intercert to weed out academic and channel non academic into trades etc. Keep the points system but adjust so that it reflects the course you want to do e.g business in uni needs A in LC etc. The abuse that goes on in the DARe and hear systems is enough to show that they are been used to slip in weak students to uni at the expense of stronger academic students. And please never make entry to 3rd require references or extra curricular or interviews.

It’s ironic that some Irish teachers, most of whom are left-leaning, ignorantly cite developments in England to support their opposition to continuous assessment (which is used throughout Europe and in America), when, in England, it’s being portrayed as a regressive legacy of Michael Gove’s time as education secretary.

All the other arguments - leaving cert is objective, promote trades, etc - are archaic.

judeboy101

ignorance is strength wrote: »

Corkgirl18 wrote: »

In what way do you think?

Practical elements as part of the final grade are currently being trialed for LC Physics.

Not sure anything’s glaringly wrong. Bit predictable and exam questions are a bit bland, but those can be fixed without changing the curriculum. I’d favour either more technical riguour or broader questions that require more creative use of physics knowledge. But I think it’s generally fine.

judeboy101 wrote: »

CA has been proven to be a disaster at 2nd level, just look at our neighbours and how they are abandoning it in favour of our terminal system. By all means update the curricula but leave the assessment alone. Externally moderated, anonymous and virtually incorruptible, thats our current system. Stop making every student stay til 18, bring back intercert to weed out academic and channel non academic into trades etc. Keep the points system but adjust so that it reflects the course you want to do e.g business in uni needs A in LC etc. The abuse that goes on in the DARe and hear systems is enough to show that they are been used to slip in weak students to uni at the expense of stronger academic students. And please never make entry to 3rd require references or extra curricular or interviews.

It’s ironic that some Irish teachers, most of whom are left-leaning, ignorantly cite developments in England to support their opposition to continuous assessment (which is used throughout Europe and in America), when, in England, it’s being portrayed as a regressive legacy of Michael Gove’s time as education secretary.

All the other arguments - leaving cert is objective, promote trades, etc - are archaic.

Let's see. We introduced project maths, universities say its a disaster. We introduce free fees, and drop out rates sky rocket. Lol grade inflation in A-levels were a direct result of CA, same as when they were introduced into Irish unis. University should be for the few, not the many. It's a hard truth but an important one. I can't think of a fairer system to access 3rd level. If you work hard you get the points, if you don't you whinge about "we need it to change" on results day you'll find very few 500+ students wanting CA, but plenty of 200~ wanting it.

ignorance is strength

judeboy101 wrote: »

Let's see. We introduced project maths, universities say its a disaster. We introduce free fees, and drop out rates sky rocket. Lol grade inflation in A-levels were a direct result of CA, same as when they were introduced into Irish unis. University should be for the few, not the many. It's a hard truth but an important one. I can't think of a fairer system to access 3rd level. If you work hard you get the points, if you don't you whinge about "we need it to change" on results day you'll find very few 500+ students wanting CA, but plenty of 200~ wanting it.

Universities have not said the new maths curriculum a disaster; a handful of out-of-touch maths academics have. And they’ve gone quiet lately.

Drop out rates are fairly low: 5% in Trinity, 10% across all universities. It’s the ITs, at 25%, where there is the problem.

The change to A levels is principally the end of modularisatiom. There was never any teacher-corrected continuous assessment.

The rest of your post speaks for itself.

judeboy101

ignorance is strength wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

Let's see. We introduced project maths, universities say its a disaster. We introduce free fees, and drop out rates sky rocket. Lol grade inflation in A-levels were a direct result of CA, same as when they were introduced into Irish unis. University should be for the few, not the many. It's a hard truth but an important one. I can't think of a fairer system to access 3rd level. If you work hard you get the points, if you don't you whinge about "we need it to change" on results day you'll find very few 500+ students wanting CA, but plenty of 200~ wanting it.

Universities have not said the new maths curriculum a disaster; a handful of out-of-touch maths academics have. And they’ve gone quiet lately.

Drop out rates are fairly low: 5% in Trinity, 10% across all universities. It’s the ITs, at 25%, where there is the problem.

The change to A levels is principally the end of modularisatiom. There was never any teacher-corrected continuous assessment.

The rest of your post speaks for itself.

Remind me what papers have you published on the subject? So publishing research that shows the inherent inadequacies in PM is out of touch, yet no research to disprove the hypothesis?seems to me that you have a serious grudge against the LC, maybe train to be a teacher and effect change. It's easy to criticise from the arm chair. Every change we have made to education has been to save money, dumb it down and make sure no one fails. Sure fail has officially ceased to exist, now one "partially achieves".

ignorance is strength

judeboy101 wrote: »

Remind me what papers have you published on the subject? So publishing research that shows the inherent inadequacies in PM is out of touch, yet no research to disprove the hypothesis?seems to me that you have a serious grudge against the LC, maybe train to be a teacher and effect change. It's easy to criticise from the arm chair. Every change we have made to education has been to save money, dumb it down and make sure no one fails. Sure fail has officially ceased to exist, now one "partially achieves".

You’re boring me.

They haven’t published research. What little there has been is in the form of newspaper articles, etc. The most recent piece of significant research was done by UL and found the maths standards of incoming first years to be decreasing across a ten year period starting in 2003. This was reported by national media as being an indictment of Project Maths, when, if anything, it was a vindication, because Protect Maths had only been implemented for two years of the study.

Grudge against the leaving cert? How could anything I’ve said indicate that? And rejecting someone’s opinion on something because they aren’t involved directly is patently irrational. I could say the same of you and your wild opinions about third level.

judeboy101

ignorance is strength wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

Remind me what papers have you published on the subject? So publishing research that shows the inherent inadequacies in PM is out of touch, yet no research to disprove the hypothesis?seems to me that you have a serious grudge against the LC, maybe train to be a teacher and effect change. It's easy to criticise from the arm chair. Every change we have made to education has been to save money, dumb it down and make sure no one fails. Sure fail has officially ceased to exist, now one "partially achieves".

You’re boring me.

They haven’t published research. What little there has been is in the form of newspaper articles, etc. The most recent piece of significant research was done by UL and found the maths standards of incoming first years to be decreasing across a ten year period starting in 2003. This was reported by national media as being an indictment of Project Maths, when, if anything, it was a vindication, because Protect Maths had only been implemented for two years of the study.

Grudge against the leaving cert? How could anything I’ve said indicate that? And rejecting someone’s opinion on something because they aren’t involved directly is patently irrational. I could say the same of you and your wild opinions about third level.

They haven't published research https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1050707

ignorance is strength

judeboy101 wrote: »

They haven't published research https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1050707

Words fail me...

ignorance is strength wrote: »

The most recent piece of significant research was done by UL and found the maths standards of incoming first years to be decreasing across a ten year period starting in 2003. This was reported by national media as being an indictment of Project Maths, when, if anything, it was a vindication, because Protect Maths had only been implemented for two years of the study.

Look, if it’s not clear to you, it is to me and anyone reading: you are ill informed and reactionary. I’m not going to waste any more time engaging with you.

judeboy101

ignorance is strength wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

They haven't published research https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1050707

Words fail me...

ignorance is strength wrote: »

The most recent piece of significant research was done by UL and found the maths standards of incoming first years to be decreasing across a ten year period starting in 2003. This was reported by national media as being an indictment of Project Maths, when, if anything, it was a vindication, because Protect Maths had only been implemented for two years of the study.

Look, if it’s not clear to you, it is to me and anyone reading: you are ill informed and reactionary. I’m not going to waste any more time engaging with you.

But, but, you said they haven't published when they actually had. Methinks tis you who is ill informed.

Corkgirl18

ignorance is strength wrote: »

Not sure anything’s glaringly wrong. Bit predictable and exam questions are a bit bland, but those can be fixed without changing the curriculum. I’d favour either more technical riguour or broader questions that require more creative use of physics knowledge. But I think it’s generally fine.

I can agree with you there. The Real World Physics textbook has been around about a decade longer than any other textbook still in use I'd say!

ignorance is strength

judeboy101 wrote: »

But, but, you said they haven't published when they actually had. Methinks tis you who is ill informed.

[head in hands] I said those opposed to Project Maths had voiced their criticism in newspaper articles. I then told you about objective academic research that has recently been published, which is a general examination of leaving cert maths standards rather than specifically of PM, and which doesn’t show what PM critics have purported.

The fact that I referred in my post to the same research that you later linked surely indicates that I was informed of it?! I don’t know whether I pity you or your students more.

judeboy101

ignorance is strength wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

But, but, you said they haven't published when they actually had. Methinks tis you who is ill informed.

[head in hands] I said those opposed to Project Maths had voiced their criticism in newspaper articles. I then told you about objective academic research that has recently been published, which is a general examination of leaving cert maths standards rather than specifically of PM, and which doesn’t show what PM critics have purported.

The fact that I referred in my post to the same research that you later linked surely indicates that I was informed of it?! I don’t know whether I pity you or your students more.

Post #14 "They haven’t published research. " your words.

As a teacher i encourage my students to admit their mistakes, otherwise they become myopic to other views but their own. It's ok to be wrong.

NorthsiderDub

Is no one going to mention the fact that the original site posted doesn't exist anymore and that this news hasn't been reported anywhere else? This might not even be true

ignorance is strength

NorthsiderDub wrote: »

Is no one going to mention the fact that the original site posted doesn't exist anymore and that this news hasn't been reported anywhere else? This might not even be true

Someone did in the fourth post. But, although there has been talk recently of a “reform” (ie update) of the Leaving Cert (and the ASTI has passed a bunch of preemptive motions concerning what they would refuse to facilitate, at their conference this week), this thread was only bumped by someone making a nonesenae comment about LC Physics.

spurious

Original article:

ignorance is strength

spurious wrote: »

Original article:

Wow, little has changed. I suppose, are there more subjects that have a course work component?