I kind of like the fact you do a broad spectrum of subjects (well in theory you do). Continuous Assessment would require a lot of inservice and training and systems set up as its a “high stakes” exam, and systems have to be put in place to stop cheating/plagiarism, though I wholeheartedly agree this is the best foot forward. Even where subjects partly have “continuous assessment” elements, such as LC Religion, CSPE, History, Geography, Science and Home Ec, its mostly done last minute (have 2 days out of class to write up their project books, as opposed to doing it as you go along) and isn’t performed over a long period, and therefore isn’t realistic. The only exceptions are JC woodwork, metalwork and Art, where it has to be done over a long period, as there are craft/making processes going on.
The UK system is majorly flawed, as in general teachers end up helping the pupils out a lot more than they should so they can keep the achievement level high/justify their jobs. I do like their AS level one year/short courses, which could complement education, however there is no LC subject is Web Design, Computing, Computer Science etc… which is a booming and growing industry here. The DES/SEC/NCCA should look into promoting more subjects like these as opposed to things like “Leaving Certificate Religious Education” as exam subjects.
I also feel there is far too much emphasis on academia, where as for example, Health and Nutrition and Physical Education are heavily neglected. We are becoming a more and more lethargic nation, so Cookery and PE (as opposed to a game of kickabout) have never been more important to teach, especially with chronic diseases like diabetes on the rise. It all starts in school.

I disagree on 2 areas there:
The points system is actually a good system – it’s our assessment system that is flawed.
Imagine this: all educational outcomes being assessed with true VALUE of the education we’d like people to have (i.e. beyond academia)& third level education taking responsibility for those who enter their courses by broadening their list of required subjects achievements, leading to LC results being valuable to the college course.

As for continuous assessment being high stakes – is that not true to say of terminal examinations? The real issue of continuous assessment is the dependence of teacher professionalism. In terms of project work and teachers assessing their own pupils you also have Construction studies so the list is a bit bigger than you’ve mentioned.

Teachers are (or should be) familiar with different modes of assessment and should be expected to be professional enough to mark papers without prejudice. Also, a system could easily be put in place to allow cross checking and/or external visits which would allow the professionalism of the teacher to be beyond reproach.

One of the modes of assessment teachers are familiar with is formative assessment. By its nature this is exactly the kind of assessment that lends itself well to continuous assessment. It allows learning from mistakes, keeps teachers up to date with progress as well as pupils and spreads the load of work rather than the pressure of a terminal exam.

Hi Tomy thanks for the response.

As regards the “high stakes” comment, I think maybe I didn’t put the point across properly. At present the Leaving Certificate is deemed a “high stakes” examination assessed in large terminally (words from the State Exams Commission). A change to continuous assessment, though desirable, could not be done over night, and would not only require syllabus reform but also entirely new syllabi to be written up to replace the old systems of assessment. I agree, when you say:

“Teachers are (or should be) familiar with different modes of assessment and should be expected to be professional enough to mark papers without prejudice. Also, a system could easily be put in place to allow cross checking and/or external visits which would allow the professionalism of the teacher to be beyond reproach.”

however, by and large this is not the case. The majority of educators, whether you agree or not teach lesson content towards exam satisfaction, and do so on a rote basis, so it is questionable does genuine learning take place in a lot of instances. If you go down the route of Continuous assessment, it also goes into the area of teachers marking their own students work, which as you said is highly contentious. I may have omitted some subjects that fall into the sphere of continuous assessment, i apologise I am not familiar with all of them, however at LC level, they all have a majority of marks to the terminal exam, and to qualify to award points, much have a MINIMUM of a 30% yield to a theory/written element, thus you have for example Art History (which is 8000 years of history, to be covered in detail), Music Theory etc… in with their practical subjects, when in other countries, they are subjects in their own right.

My main gripe with the points system is its is much easier to get A grades in some subjects for relatively little work compared to others, i.e. the amount of examinable material, number of individual exam elements, numbers taking the subjects etc…this is even more evident when schools bring in subjects that deliver easy A’s like Agricultural Science, which is now in a lot of city schools, despite it having limited relevance to the learners, and other subject areas which are harder or more difficult to get A’s in like Home Economics, Art, Construction Studies, to name a few, are cut or only given to “weaker students”, such that all subject areas are not on a level playing field.

The other issue is that say someone who is a C level in French, may be A level in Italian, as there is less competition to fit into the different grade brackets, as more than ten times the numbers do french compared to Italian. You are not marked on how good you are, you are marked on how good you are compared to everyone else sitting the exam.

Another point I would like to expand on from before is the fact that there is a lack of diverse subjects on offer. We should be really promoting Areas like Chinese/Japanese, ICT, Software Development, etc…within second level schools.

As regards your comments on Formative Assessment, The SEC will never 100% abandon terminal assessment. It will always be there in some shape or form. We are not going to see Leaving Certificate/Senior Cycle Changes until at least 2017 at the earliest, seeing that the Junior Cycle changes won’t be in until 2014 IIRC.

Not that I want to pick holes in what you’re saying because in many ways I agree but there are things you’re saying there that I think kind of offer their own answers.

If you’re saying that teachers by and large teach rote and they do so because of the exam, then change the exam and assessment modes.

And if teachers are teaching to an exam/assessment mode then they aren’t teaching to a syllabus at all, unless the syllabus matches the assessment.

To that end, by teaching to assessment, there is simply no need for a syllabus (or at least, the syllabus is self defining to an extent).

If that’s the case then what we need in order to offer a truly valuable and measurable system we need valuable and comprehensive assessments. If these assessments go beyond knowledge and measure understanding, application etc then you end teaching by rote.

I’d agree with you on the span of difficulty in subjects – it’s kind of ridiculous. I remember one of my lecturers in UL saying that while she was teaching science she had a bunch of students who approached her with a petition to do Agricultural Science – simply because they regarded it as an easy A. Again though that’s not so much the points system at fault rather than the way the subjects are examined. The exam sets the bar. If the exam was more difficult then it would change pupils’ perspectives.

Tomy I can totally see your view, and where you are coming from, in fact I wish things could just be changed as easily as they should be. I have previously worked in Education, and as someone who has lobbied for curricular change, I know that there is a hell of a lot of red tape in place to deal with before changes can take place. I think a lot has to do with the subject being taught and the methodologies employed by the teacher.

In a lot of cases the marking scheme sets the tone, not the syllabus. Art for example (which incidentally has had only cosmetic updates since it came onto stream 41 years ago in 1971) the syllabus dictates students should have a broad knowledge of Art History from the year dot to present day. Conversely, what is asked on the papers is often verging on third level answers, and will be a subject area so obscure or not covered in any amount of detail, and its only 3/8 of the marks for the exam. While I agree things should not be made too easy, they should not be made too difficult either. I truly think the only way forward is not just to have continuous assessment, but also continuously assess learning takes place, which is more difficult that you would think. Practical application of learning is also needed. It is rather insane that, for example the first time you are assessed formally on your ability to speak a foreign language is a couple of weeks before your leaving certificate.

How would continuous assessment work in Ireland? Would the local TD be involved if poor Johnny was getting a hard time from the oul teacher?

medicine isnt 600 points anymore and there is an aptitude test.

Well done Serge! Congratulations and best of luck with your chosen course
:-)

may i recommend Bass for this evening?

Well done Serge and congratulations on getting the points you need.

Thank you all! I’m close to that stage in life where I’m about to be flunged rather violently into the real world and hey I can’t wait! :) So naive!

I dont agree Aidan. Granted you have to study subjects that will literally have no value to you later in life depending on your career path, it is a good devlopment tool. It lays the foundation for college in that it at least guides you on what works well study wise for you, and what doesnt. I would agree that some subjects are pointless, but the core ones such as Engliash and Maths should have a greater weighting than all the rest as the rest will only be useful depending on your career choice i.e. Irish for a teacher or politician, business, economics and accounting for business careers etc. Their should be more emphasis on career guidance in schools, particularly in transition year so you dont have to waste your time with pointless subjects because lets be honest, how many people actually use history or geography after school, especially now theres sat navs and wikipaedia

And there you have it the cold hard truth, very well argued. It’s a bit frightening and maybe dramatic in a sense to say that your leaving cert. results will ultimately determine your socio-economic status, with the increase in mature students returning to college who may have had poor leaving cert. results, yet are aptly suited to their chosen course, hopefully that’s an outdated point but thought provoking nonetheless.

That fact that you have to repeat to get what you want would tend to indicate that it is actually important.

In the short term

Absolutely – the further away you get from the Leaving, the less important it becomes.

@Donal – The same is true for a degree. The further away you get from your degree the less important it becomes and experience is the key.

Hardly surprising with this weather!

You may have proved the importance of studying English though.

:))