Assuming they get that far by doing well in the memory test that is the Leaving Cert.
Assuming they get that far by doing well in the memory test that is the Leaving Cert.But in pure bang-for-buck terms that €30k would be much better spent on subsidising a taught masters, qualification or other professional training in a high-paid industry,
Life is a memory testAssuming they get that far by doing well in the memory test that is the Leaving Cert.
No it's not. The function of education should be to develop the mind and teach people to think critically.Life is a memory test
It's a bit of both. My son hates learning his eight-times tables at the moment but this is a very useful life skill.No it's not. The function of education should be to develop the mind and teach people to think critically.
My son is doing the Leaving Cert this year. It's all about learning the right answers rather than offering an informed opinion in both History and English, particularly in History. He's pointed out things in his book which are factually incorrect but he's been told that the person checking the paper won't know that so give the answers which are expected.It's a bit of both. My son hates learning his eight-times tables at the moment but this is a very useful life skill.
A lot of the LC is critical thinking anyway: the history and English exams for example aren't about listing dates or writing poetry from memory.
Well that wasn't my approach, and I got an A1 in bothIt's all about learning the right answers rather than offering an informed opinion in both History and English,
There was no A1's in my day, just A's and B's. I got an A and a B but I did find it a memory test back then and from what I can see little has changed.Well that wasn't my approach, and I got an A1 in both
My son is doing the Leaving Cert this year. It's all about learning the right answers rather than offering an informed opinion in both History and English, particularly in History. He's pointed out things in his book which are factually incorrect but he's been told that the person checking the paper won't know that so give the answers which are expected.
But then it isn't reliant on the child's performance in one written exam. There are a number of different considerations to giving a child a place in a college.On similar theme, I watched the 'Varsity Blues / College Admissions scandal' document on Netflix last night. It was pretty interesting and made good points that standardized testing is flawed. The children of wealthy / affluent / educated parents should statistically perform better. The admission process and pressure on children in the US seems very intense.
I suppose standardized testing removes subjectivity from the marker but it does weaken the learning experience.
Children of tall people are generally taller than the rest of us.. It was pretty interesting and made good points that standardized testing is flawed. The children of wealthy / affluent / educated parents should statistically perform better.
It's a good way of testing if they have remembered what they were told, and that's fine.Children of tall people are generally taller than the rest of us.
This does not make a measuring tape "flawed". It is just a tool for measuring height the same way that standardized testing is just a tool for measuring cognitive ability.
Children of tall people are generally taller than the rest of us.
This does not make a measuring tape "flawed". It is just a tool for measuring height the same way that standardized testing is just a tool for measuring cognitive ability.
I agree.It's a good way of testing if they have remembered what they were told, and that's fine.
Our system doesn't teach people to have an enquiring and open mind or to think critically. It prepares them for an entry test for third level. That's all the Leaving Cert is.
I agree. They are, as a cohort, generally better educated, more engaged in their children's education and more likely to see the benefits of education generally.The point the documentary was making is that the 'rich' people have the means to prepare their children better, be that hire tutors, buy test prep etc.
Even when I was a teenager you could learn a huge amount just by going to the local library and reading. That's what I did anyway and I'm sure it helped me do well in exams. My parents didn't encourage or prevent me. The library could have been filled with other teenagers but it generally wasn't.The point the documentary was making is that the 'rich' people have the means to prepare their children better, be that hire tutors, buy test prep etc.
It's not down to any one factor but environment matters. It might matter most, most of the time. The school is part of the environment but it certainly isn't all of it.Even when I was a teenager you could learn a huge amount just by going to the local library and reading. That's what I did anyway and I'm sure it helped me do well in exams. My parents didn't encourage or prevent me. The library could have been filled with other teenagers but it generally wasn't.
It's even better now as any teenager has pretty much the sum of human knowledge searchable on a smartphone. Despite this, educational achievement still varies hugely.
People are going to need to come up with a better theory than environment.
A good teacher with 30 pupils is much better than a bad one with 20. There is probably some upper limit (my dad claims there were 50 pupils in his junior infants class which was probably hard to manage) but in the 20-30 range we are talking about class sizes just don't matter.He also makes some very interesting comments on class sizes (they don't matter)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?