Sir, – While no member of my family is or was a secondary-school teacher, and while I do not want my daughter hanging around the house today any more than any other parent does, I nevertheless feel compelled to support the teachers.
Firstly, no one doubts that a system based solely on rote learning needs reform. Presumably the main players in a consultative process with this aim would be those who are actually engaged daily in this very system. So who exactly came up with the new proposals? Patently not the teachers.
Secondly, while in theory project based learning sounds ideal, how does one really make that system objective and standardised. There is the very real problem of parental involvement, which biases the outcome towards students in areas with higher overall educational levels.
Then there is the problem of relativity. Take two children, one from an academic, affluent school, the other from an inner city disadvantaged school. If they both achieve A grades on a given project relative to the other students in the class, are these grades really comparable, or are they purely relative to the overall standard of their particular schools? Both grades represent laudable achievements , but what they do not represent is an objective standardised system, so let’s not pretend they do.
Maybe the answer is to stick with project-based learning assessed by the students’ own teachers. But let’s not call this a national Junior Certificate, because it will not be. – Yours, etc, SUSAN FITZGERALD Blackrock, Co Dublin.
Sir, – I am in favour of introducing some project work into curricula, but having too much of it could be detrimental and unmanageable, very hard to objectively access and not necessarily good for the learning process.
The fundamentals in any discipline have to be learned. Fears that the baby could be thrown out with the bathwater are very well grounded. – Yours, etc, CORA STACK, Institute of Technology Tallaght, Dublin. Sir, – Primary-level teachers, who are very close to their pupils, are able to give them all their assessments and grades, which may well influence their educational choices.
Third-level teachers, who often aren’t even trained as educators, are able to give their students all their grades that decide their level of degree and, frequently, their choice of career.
But why is it that second-level teachers, who claim to be highly-trained professionals, are unable to award even 40 per cent of the marks in an exam that is of little or no importance to students’ futures? – Yours, etc, KEVIN T RYAN, Castletroy, Limerick. A chara, As a teacher of 41 years standing, I would like to think of myself as being as fair and as unbiased as the next.
However, I would not trust my own impartiality and may be already mentally and emotionally hard-wired to favour: my immediate and extended family; the children of friends and colleagues; children from dysfunctional families who are barely able to hang on; children who have experienced trauma or bereavements; the guys who try hard but never seem to get it quite right; the witty guy who is always in good form; the fine athletes; the academically gifted who are prone to make the odd mistake and,of course the children of Johnny, the local mechanic who would never let you down. – Yours, etc, GEARÓID Ó CIARÁIN Terenure, Dublin 12.
Sir, – As a retired teacher I strongly believe that teachers and students can benefit from the proposals on assessment for Junior Certificate.
Assessment is a core teaching responsibility and an integral part of effective learning. The proposals will give teachers and schools greater ownership and responsibility for teaching and learning, thereby promoting increased teacher collaboration in schools.
My main concern is that schools and teachers be given time to do the work. The lack of structured planning time is a major weakness in our second-level system. – Yours, etc, DESMOND MOONEY Newtownforbes, Co Longford.