Want to be a teacher? Why bother!

I love being a teacher. I enjoy almost everything about it - the interactions with my students inside and outside the classroom, the comradery of the staff room, my involvement in school sports, drama & other extracurricular activities. I love my subject (science) and learn something new about it everyday. I love the opportunity my job gives me to explore new ways to teach and I enjoy collaborating with my colleagues to ensure we provide the best education possible in our school. I also enjoy collaborating with like minded teachers on twitter, ensuring my approach to teaching doesn't stay stagnant and constantly keeps evolving to keep up with new technologies and philosophies. In my role as guidance counsellor I get a great sense of satisfaction when speaking to young people about their future careers and helping them develop the tools to deal with personal troubles when they arise.

I'm not rich and I'm not poor. The past number of years have been tough for everyone in Ireland and I am very lucky to be working full time in a wonderful school. However, I have endured a pay reduction of around 15% in that period, through the combined effects of pay cuts and pension levies, and like everyone else things have become much tighter of late. 

But this compares little to the plight of newly qualified teachers - who have endured a cut in pay close to 33%. I simply can't believe that our government has allowed the introduction of this two-tier system through these drastic pay cuts (10% on top of our 15%) as well as the removal of allowances for newly qualified teachers. The starting wage for a full time newly qualified teacher is now just over €27,000. The average industrial wage in Ireland in 2011 was just shy of €36,000 (CSO). 

Let's put that in perspective. Teachers are highly qualified individuals. All must have a three or four year primary degree and a post graduate diploma in education (which will be two years long from 2012). The cost fee alone for the five or six years could top €15,000 and of course there are living costs involved too. (Trainee teachers do not get paid in Ireland). Then, on completion of their training they begin their working life on €27,000. Well not exactly.

Science Community Asked to Help Shape Future of Irish Science Education

The National Council for Curriculum & Assessment (NCCA) revealed earlier this year their new vision for senior cycle science education in Ireland – new draft syllabi for Leaving Certificate biology, chemistry and physics and a dramatic change in how they could be assessed. The NCCA also opened up a consultation process to allow scientists, outreach groups, teachers, parents, students or anyone interested in science education the chance to mould the future course of science education in Ireland. 

The NCCA’s aim is to create a “learner centred” approach to science education with a spotlight on developing scientific literacy, critical thinking skills, communication skills and the cultivation of analytical proficiency across all the senior sciences. 

There have obviously been some changes to the content of each of the syllabi with some material added and other elements removed – which is sure to cause much discussion. However, the most significant change is a shift in the focus of the assessment from purely examination based to the incorporation of a new practical component. 

When introduced candidate will receive twenty percent of their total mark, in each of the subjects, based on the completion of mandatory practicals throughout the two years of study (5%) and a 90 minute practical test (15%) where pupils will be asked to complete a series of three or four short set tasks. These tasks will aim to assess their practical skills and their ability to analyse data and draw conclusions. Some of the material within this practical assessment will be beyond the scope of the syllabus. 

The terminal exam will also look to challenge the candidates more and reward students with a greater understanding of the scientific method. The NCCA have just recently released samples of the types of question which could be included and they are a welcome move from the current style of exam question in Leaving Certificate which, more often than not, rewards the students capable of remembering facts and regurgitating them on paper come exam day. 

The consultation process, which closes on Friday (October 28th), is a chance for anyone with an interest in science to shape the future direction of science education. 

Over the past number of weeks, science teachers around the country have been meeting to discuss the new syllabi, the proposed changes, additions, deletions and to consider the new approach to assessment. By all accounts these meetings have been very productive and the Irish Science Teachers’ Association (ISTA) will be submitting the teacher feedback to the NCCA. 

However, it is also incredibly important that the Irish scientific community are willing to contribute to this consultation process. It is vital that the new syllabi are up-to-date with new scientific thinking; include the latest advances in scientific understanding; contain relevant content and develop the required skills for the next generation of Irish scientists. 

This is an excellent opportunity to influence how science will be taught in this country over the next decade and there is a responsibility on everyone involved in Irish science to ensure that this new direction is the right one. So please take some time to review the new syllabi and to fill out the short questionnaires so that the NCCA can mould these draft syllabi into structures that promote the sciences and develop scientific literacy.

University Plans to Down-Grade the Post-Graduate Diploma in Education

Below is a short post from a student teacher, who wished to remain anonymous, on a decision made by our country's universities to down-grade the Post Graduation Diploma in Education (PGDE) from a National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) Level 9 qualification to a Level 8 (at the same level as a Higher Degree) - without any consultation with the students who have registered and paid for their course. The course is also being renamed a Professional Diploma in Education. This is the final year that the "H-Dip" will be a one year course, being replaced by a two year long course from 2012. It is unclear if the new course will be a NFQ Level 8 or 9.

There has no coverage of this story by any newspaper or online news site, principally because only one university has informed the students on the changes. The student teacher, who has a legal background, outlines the many problems associated with the changes - which appear to me to constitute a breach of contract in the very least with everyone having registered and paid for the course advertised as a NFQ Level 9 qualification. The changes - which have been implemented and not merely suggested - seem outrageous to me, especially considering media outcry on the use of under-qualified individuals in teaching positions. Interestingly, when contacted, the ASTI and the Teaching Council were unaware of the changes and were unable to provide any advice to the student teacher. Anyway, this is what our student teacher has to say, describing the situation as "a real case of more stress and officially less success".

As I sat in my PGDE lecture the other day I was treated at the start to the usual drudgery of announcements, one flippant remark was made as the announcer was about to exit the theatre. It was something along these lines:

Just to let you all know the course has been renamed the Professional Diploma in Education, it has also been downgraded to level 8 from level 9 on the NFQ framework. 

Interesting, I thought, we were told if we had any questions please send an email. Out the announcer waltzed and the lecture started! 

So what does this mean for this year’s PGDE / (PDE!!) students? Well, there are some serious questions which need answering!

1. Is the qualification still internationally recognised? 
2. Are we going to be the only level 8 year? If the course becomes 2 years will the new course be level 8 or 9? 
3. When we are qualified will we be on the same pay scale as teachers with the level 9 qualification? 
4. Has the cost of the course been reduced in line with its downgrade? Will we be getting a refund? 
5. Will students be able to get a grant for the course considering they already have a level 8 qualifications to get on the course? 
6. Will this year’s students be disadvantaged when interviewing for a position against a candidate with a level 9 qualification? 

As it can be seen this change has brought up numerous issues which affect all of this year’s PGDE students, all of whom applied, were accepted, registered and paid for the PGDE not the PDE. On a very simple level this looks to be a cheap shot, a badly disguised austerity measure. What is more frustrating is there has been no communication on the issue, nobody in the School of Education can answer any of these questions as they plainly don’t seem to know. The Teaching Council also didn’t know of this change when contacted. 

Please leave your comments below as I feel this issue of a grave importance. We already have a situation where new entrants into the teaching profession will be paid 10% less than their colleagues, and on a lower pay scale. Another blow such as this is going to detract talented young minds from the teaching profession, causing further problems down the road. Please, pass on this post also.

New Year, Same Argument: Standards in Maths & Science

Last year I wrote a piece on this blog arguing the case for the supposedly poor standards in maths and science in this country and specifically in the leaving certificate. I feel it important to reiterate some of the points made in that post (and some new ones) as the issues seems to reoccur every year and I feel it is unfairly represented in the media - especially in print. 

The Leaving Certificate is a deliberately broad curriculum requiring candidates to study at least six subjects over a two year period. Most study seven while some study eight. This broad curriculum does not suit most individuals and is the exception rather than rule when compared to most other European countries - who generally adopt a more focused curriculum in the senior cycle - for example UK students study a minimum of three subjects at A Levels. This all means that the average leaving cert pupil will spend approximately 45 minutes with each subject per day - five or six lesson periods per week per subject including subjects like maths, physics or chemistry. This simply isn't enough time to reach the standards that we set for ourselves. We need to allocate more class contact time with pupils for all subjects if we are to meet our own high expectations. To do this we need to either increase the school day (Ireland already has one of the longest schools days in Europe) or reduce the number of subjects required at leaving certificate. For me, the latter is the most obvious for a number of reasons. At the moment leaving cert students are seen to make their subject choices based on which subjects are easiest to obtain good grades in - besides aptitude and interest. Reducing the number of subject taught at leaving cert would mean a more focused approach could be taken in the subjects, more class contact time given to each subject, more time for exploring the practical applications of subjects like maths and science in these classes and less pupils picking subjects that they neither have an aptitude for or an interest in. This would also allow the students with a strong aptitude in science and maths to focus on these subjects without having to study subjects that they have no interest or aptitude in.

In Ireland, mathematics is a compulsory subject at leaving certificate. To compare the performance of every Irish student in mathematics to students in other European countries is simply unfair. In the UK, only 30% of A Level students study mathematics this year. While on paper the standards they achieve is very high (around 44% achieve A*'s or A's annually) the A Level system has been undergoing dramatic grade inflation over the past decade. They also have more class contact time due to their more focused curriculum. It must also be remembered that an A grade in Ireland is awarded for scores over 85% while in the UK it's 70%. Granted, there is a high failure rate in maths in Ireland but if the subject was optional these students would choose subjects more suited to their aptitudes.

In Ireland, over 50% of leaving cert students choose a science in their senior cycle. When compared to the UK the figure is around 17%). This figure is mainly down to the numbers of students studying biology while the percentage of students studying chemistry and physics in Ireland is slightly lower than our nearest neighbours. This all comes down to the so called "points race". Students choose seven or eight subjects which they feel will allow them get the most points. Chemistry and physics are known as more difficult subjects so less students choose to study them. The high numbers in biology are down to students requiring at least six subjects and to "keeping their options open" in terms of university choice (it is also perceived as an easy option). Neither outcome is favourable. We have students capable (and possibly interested) in studying physics and chemistry but choosing not to because of the points system. We have students choosing biology who have neither the interest nor aptitude. We need radical reform of the points system to remove these negative outcomes and encourage more students to study the sciences for the right reasons. 

We also need to remove the leaving cert's dependence on the terminal exam. These exams are good are assessing rote learning or the ability to learn off definitions and formulas. They are limited at determining the candidates ability to problem solve or adopt scientific knowledge to practical problems. This is what science is about - it's a process not a collection of facts and figures. At the moments we are in a system which rewards rote learning and memorising facts. We want to teach students to ask questions not answer them. This will mean a change in how we assess our students and will require some form of continuous assessment. The ASTI don't like that word but teachers and their unions need to take as much responsibility for educational reform as politicians should. No longer can we see ourselves as pawns in the process - we are part of the system and the ones best positioned to offer advice and suggestions for our system's urgent reform.

Finally, I can plead to the Irish media adopt just one stance on this issue. Either complain about grade inflation in the leaving cert or poor standards. You can't have it both ways. To say in one article that the number of pupils achieving A's is rising and this needs to be addressed and in another criticise teachers and the DES for poor standards simply won't cut it. Make up your mind on what you want to report on.

So, to conclude, we need to:

• Remove the points system as it currently stands and radically reform how students are chosen for university entry.
• Reduce the number of subjects studied for the leaving certificate to four.
• Make maths optional allowing the syllabus to expand.
• Make our assessment procedures less exam focused.
• Teachers need to take responsibility for educational reform too and become more proactive in this regard.

NCCA Reveals New Biology, Chemistry & Physics Syllabi

The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment have revealed their new syllabi for senior biology, physics and chemistry. The concurrent release of the syllabi is no coincidence and marks a new direction for senior cycle science in Ireland, or so they promise. The NCCA have also formally opened a consultation process on the new syllabi, asking teachers, parents, students and members of the science community to comment on the content and approach outlined in their documents.

There has obviously been changes to the content of each of the syllabi but the biggest change in approach to senior cycle science is the introduction of a practical component in the assessment procedures for each of the subjects. Twenty percent of a pupils total mark in each of the subjects will be awarded based on the completion of mandatory practicals throughout the two years of study (5%) and a 90 minute practical test (15%) where pupils will be asked complete a series of three or four short set tasks, assessing their practical skills and ability to analyse data and draw conclusions. Some of the material within this practical assessment will be beyond the scope of the syllabus.

A brief look at the syllabi reveals plenty use of "copy and paste" between them (the most obvious of this is in the assessment procedures of each syllabus, which are so alike they all are entitled "ASSESSMENT IN LEAVING CERTIFICATE BIOLOGY"). The key skills targeted in each syllabus are appropriate and laudable (the key skills are identified as information processing, being personally effective, communicating, critical and creative thinking and working with others). I applaud the use of terms like "design", "apply knowledge", "interpret", "discuss" and "analyse" in the learning outcomes of each syllabus but I am concerned that the syllabi is still very teacher driven and exam orientated.

Consultation to Begin Shortly on New Biology, Physics & Chemistry Syllabi

I have just received an email from Yvonne Higgins, Chairperson of the Irish Science Teachers Association, indicating that the new syllabi in Biology, Chemistry and Physics are being sent out to teachers for consultation. The email reads:

"At the NCCA Board of Studies meeting on 16 February it was agreed that the draft syllabi for all three subjects should be sent out for consultation. I have been in touch with the NCCA and have been informed that these syllabi will be available in April. The ISTA will be organising branch meeting to discuss the syllabi. Comments will have to be returned to the NCCA by October 2011 and the ISTA will be making formal responses to each syllabus by this time."

The consultation process will provide teachers with the opportunity to comment on the content of the new syllabi while I also hope that we will be given the chance to comment on the assessment procedures. As mentioned in my recent post on More Stress Less Success I made the point that our current syllabi are far too descriptive and lack wonder, while the assessment procedures promote regurgitation and not thinking. The consultation process will end on October and the syllabus will likely to be introduced for September 2012 or 2013. I still feel that the process is too slow and I hope the new syllabi account for the every changing nature of science and include some "non examined" material. Time will tell but at least the process has began. Well done to all teachers involved in the process in the creation of these syllabi and I look forward to seeing the fruits of your hard work. For more information on the work of the Irish Science Teachers' Association or to find out about membership click here.

Putting Wonder Back in to Science Education

Fellow science teacher and blogger Noel Cunningham, from King's Hospital School in Dublin, recently wrote an excellent blog post on the "Wonder in Science - And Why We Hide It". In the post he bemoans the inherent lack of wonder in the Irish science syllabi, both at junior and senior cycle, revealing our science curricula as boring and dull. He later posted an apology to students of second level science everywhere, past present and future, for putting them through the ordeal he so elequently describes here:

We educators take this incredibly exotic jungle of knowledge called science and distil it until all the wonder has been removed and we are left with nothing but a heap of dry shavings. We then pour this into our syllabus and textbooks and make our students learn it off by heart so that it can all get vomited back up come exam time. And then we wonder why so many young people don’t like science.

I would like to add my own voice to that apology because I too am "a cog in this horrible machine". I too turned my back on true science and asked my pupils to learn by memorising, regurgitating facts and formulas for tests and exams. I too stifled the wonder in science, in exchange for exam success, "results" if you can call them that. In recent years I have endeavoured to bring wonder back into my science classroom, using the Frog Blog as the main tool, to reveal science as the ever evolving and living subject that it is - not a collection of facts, equations and dull "experiments" as portrayed by the syllabi and textbooks. 

Last week I attended the Atlantic STEM Conference and Leo Enright, the conference chair, made the point that the NCCA were doing "great things" in bringing the science curricula in line with the economic needs of the country - developing the "future skills for future jobs". The extraordinary claim was made during a debate on promoting sciences in second level schools and I simply had to interject. The NCCA's last offering was the 2003 revised syllabus for junior science, which is universally regarded as a dull and lifeless representation of my life passion. The syllabus is too broad, still too exam focused and the practical component is a mere gesture  rather than any concerted effort to bring true investigation into our science classrooms. It is so devoid of wonder and awe that it fails to ignite even the most inquisitive mind. For example, there is no mention of space in the syllabus, no astronomy whatsoever! Why? Are they afraid that pupils might find this interesting and then ignore the section of conservation of matter or, heaven forbid, forget that V = R X I? 

Fine Gael - Labour Programme for Government: ICT in Education

This is an interesting snippet from the new Fine Gael - Labour Programme for Government on their policy on '21st Century Schools'. What are your opinions on their plans?

"The Government will end the treatment of ICT in education as a stand alone issue, but will integrate it across education policy.This will begin with merging the National Centre for Technology in Education with the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. .... The primary priority for investment in ICT in the immediate term will be the the integration of teaching and learning across the curriculum and investing in broadband development to ensure schools have access to fibre-powered broadband. Investment in ICT will be maximised through pooling of ICT procurement. Greater use of online platforms will be made to offer a wide range of subjects and lessons online, and to enable schools to "share" teachers via live web casts. These online lessons will be made available through a new Digital School Resource, bringing together existing resources from NCCA, Dept. of Education and other sources as a cost effective means of sharing expertise between schools. We will engage with the publishing industry to develop more online resources and new mediums for their learning materials."

Shattering the Myth Of A World Class Education System

In today's Irish Times, Education Editor Seán Flynn takes at how Ireland fares in the most recent OECD report - and apparent we're not "ticking all the right boxes".

The latest OECD findings expose the Irish education system for what it is – a lot less successful than we like to tell ourselves

In the dark days – and there has been a good number of late – we could at least find comfort in the quality of our education system. For years, ministers for education and the teacher unions told us we could take pride in our “world class” education system. It was the magnet that helped to draw inward investment to our shores – and it was something that differentiated us from troubled education systems in Britain and elsewhere. When it came to education, the land of saints and scholars could mix it with the folks at the top table.

It’s not an exaggeration to say this portrayal of the Irish education system was almost entirely based on one authoritative study. In 2000, the OECD/Pisa* survey of 15-year-olds ranked Ireland fifth in literacy, well above the OECD average. This glowing report helped to stifle much-needed debate about the quality of the Irish education system. Naysayers could be rebuked and brought to heel by reference back to that OECD survey. Over the years, the mantra from the Department of Education and the teacher unions became familiar: “We can’t be doing much wrong if we are in the top five in literacy.”

The truth, of course, was more complicated. Ireland performed well in the 2000 literacy survey because it had an inherent advantage, a homogenous school-going population with few migrants. In simple terms, the task of imparting literacy in Irish classrooms was less challenging than that facing teachers in inner-city Paris or in central London.

No!!! to a Two Tier Teaching Profession

 

On reading our government's Nation Recovery Plan I have become extremely dismayed. Their savage cuts in education are going to hit the most vulnerable in society - a reduction in third level grants, student fee increases, reduction in teacher numbers in both primary and secondary, a 10% reduction in "new entrants" into the teaching profession, a reduction in support staff, a reduction in the number of resource teachers for traveller children, a cap on special needs assistants, a loss of language support teachers and an overall cut of 360 million Euro over 4 years.

But it is the creation of a two tier teaching profession that worries me most. There can be no situation where a "new entrant" into the teaching profession can be valued at 10% less than someone with one more year's experience. This is truly a disturbing development and one which must not be allowed to come to fruition. It's worth noting that the government have yet to state if new TD's will suffer this 10% cut but it is widely believed that they won't. There is another issue too - that of the definition of "new entrant". It is being claimed that a "new entrant" not only includes new public servants but also individuals who are returning to the public service after a break of more than 26 weeks. If this is true a situation could arise where an experienced teacher, who may have left the profession for a short period, would return to the lowest increment and suffer a 10% on top of that - effectively cutting their entitled wages enormously. 

There are also concerns for privately paid teachers, including myself. I am not a public servant but am paid the same pay scale as someone on my state wage with the same level of teaching experience and qualifications (I incidentally pay into the Teacher Superannuation Scheme too). So, should I decide to return to a public school or indeed be moved onto the incremental staff of my own school, will I suffer the same consequences too? - a return to point one on the scale and a 10% pay cut on top of that? All this needs to be clarified immediately and is a serious worry!

We cannot allow our staff rooms to be split into a two tiers, with one side paid 10% more than the other, and I certainly don't wish to be put in that position. The professional integrity of the teaching profession needs to be kept intact. For this reason I call on the Teaching Council, who's role is to "to promote teaching as a profession at primary and post-primary levels, to promote the professional development of teachers and to regulate standards in the profession", to stand up for teachers and not allow the government introduce these grossly unfair amendments to our terms of employment. To date few teachers are seeing the value of the Teaching Council and look to their unions to defend the integrity of profession. If the Teaching Council cannot do this or deems it outside their remit, then I see little value in its existence either.

New Formula for Changing Mathematics Education

In this very short video from Ted.com, Arthur Benjamin gives his new formula for reform in mathematics education. Benjamin is a mathematician and magician (he coined the term mathemagics to amalgamate his two passions) and sees calculus as having little influence on our everyday lives. However, he sees one area of mathematics that can aid our understanding of economics, financing and business - statistics and probability. Do you agree with him?

Top 100 Best Paid in Education

In today's Irish Times, Education Editor Seán Flynn along with Peter McGuire exposes the extraordinary high levels of pay in the upper echelons of Irish educational administration. Below is an extract from Seán's article (with kind permission from the author) outlining the top 10 Irish earners in education. For the full article click here.

At a time of unprecedented budget cuts and the possible return of third-level fees, SEAN FLYNN and PETER MCGUIRE reveal the salaries of the highest earners in Irish education

OVER 75 per cent of the €8.59 billion education budget is absorbed by pay and pensions. This means that all other education services must be funded from the €2.14 billion non-pay element of the budget. Overall, Ireland has one of the lowest levels of education spending in the OECD. It is ranked close to the bottom of international league tables when it comes to spending in relation to GDP.

The consequences of this under-investment are evident throughout the sector. It can be seen in dilapidated classrooms, lack of adequate support for information technology, meagre investment in early childhood education, lack of basic school facilities, and so on.

But a striking feature of the Irish education service is the relatively high rates of pay for academics and bureaucrats – especially at senior levels.

Today’s survey of the high earners in education comes amid increasing calls for a €100,000 cap on public service salaries. Many of those featured on this page point out they have already taken pay cuts and absorbed the public service pension levy. The universities say they need to pay the best to attract the best. But the top earners also include senior figures from the huge number of education quangos.

In all, more than 60 staff in the education sector earn more than €150,000, according to The Irish Times survey. A further 476 staff earn more than €110,000. In all, 497 people are on the professorial salary scale, €113,573–€145,952.

No More Republic of Average

Below is a very interesting article from Fine Gael TD Brian Hayes, who suggests 10 ways to break "the grip of smugness" within our educational system.

I enjoyed my time over the past three years as Fine Gael’s education spokesman. Every day close to one million people in the Republic are in some way involved in education as either providers or students. From the teaching unions to parent representatives, I met great people who are committed to educational excellence. As a politician it’s one of the few areas of public policy where you can make a direct difference. Unlike being at, for example, the Department of the Environment or the Department of Transport, EU directives don’t really stand in the way of what you’d want to do if you were to arrive in Marlborough Street as minister for education.

Our economic recovery and educational reform here in Ireland go hand in hand. The current crisis provides us with a great opportunity to push through the type of reform agenda that is required.

The former Intel chief, Dr Craig Barrett, was right when he said that average isn’t good enough any more. But Irish education is exactly that: average. What’s needed is a new higher standard, underpinned by radical reform. When the Finnish economy crashed after the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, educational reform was seen as crucial to rebuilding Finland. Over 10 years Finland went from being a basket-case to a smart economy where new technology replaced old.