Shelving of interim Leaving Cert change casts doubt on more contentious reforms
Unveiled by Education Minister Norma Foley last March, the plans for Senior Cycle reform reads like a map of proposed changes, ultimately aiming to “significantly reduce” the reliance on the final set of exams in June, as well as to introduce some form of teacher-based assessment and new and revised subject curricula. File photo: Sam Boal/Rollingnews.ie
Even the Leaving Cert’s greatest defenders have long conceded that major elements need updating. Now in existence since 1925, it faces regular accusations of being an outdated and crude instrument to measure the full extent of a student’s academic success.
Despite broad consensus that changes are needed, one of the most immediate has now been put on the back burner. Could this signal trouble ahead for more contentious elements of Leaving Cert reform that will need buy-in and support from classrooms?
Plans to revamp Senior Cycle have been in the works for quite some time, with the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) beginning to scope out a review in 2016.
As part of this initial prep work, the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) found a “strong appetite” amongst students, parents, and teachers for changing senior cycle education, which incorporates Transition Year, 5th Year, and 6th Year.
Mainly, they wanted the focus of any reforms on changing the assessment approach from the final Leaving Cert exams, therefore reducing stress and capturing a broader range of skills.
Then came the pandemic. The general chaos 2020 inflicted on the education system only added momentum to plans for change. It seemed unimaginable before covid that the State exams could be canceled, and that thousands of teachers would grade their own students in order for them to progress to the next step of their education.
Rows ensued at times, and mistakes were made along the way, but the process showed it could be done, albeit on an emergency basis. It prompted wider debates about the purpose of the Leaving Cert, as well as opposing calls for the State exams to be scrapped altogether, or for the return of ‘traditional’ exams entirely.
Unveiled by Education Minister Norma Foley last March, the plans for Senior Cycle reform reads like a map of proposed changes, ultimately aiming to “significantly reduce” the reliance on the final set of exams in June, as well as to introduce some form of teacher-based assessment and new and revised subject curricula.
Announcing the plans, the Minister said the changes would mean a “move to a model that uses other forms of assessment, over a less concentrated time period, in line with international best practice.”
While most changes are expected to be gradually phased in over the coming years, the plan also set out as an “interim measure” that Paper 1 in both Irish and English would be assessed at the end of fifth year, from 2024, as an attempt to spread the assessment burden.
Marks would then be banked and added to the student's Paper 2 after they completed the paper in June 2025. Speaking to RTÉ that day, the Minister said she believed "100% of the exam being taken on one day in June is a considerable stress for students".
However, the move was met with much opposition. The Irish National Organisation of English Teachers (INOTE) said it feared the move would "cut the heart" out of the subject.
English Paper 1, in its current form, assesses students on comprehension and composing, while Irish paper 1 involves essay writing and the ‘listening’ exam. As these skills are developmental, INOTE argued the plan could disadvantage students who often need the sixth year to fully mature their writing and language skills.
Read More
The group also raised fears that feeling under pressure to commit to a level of examination far earlier than usual, many students may not be as willing to ‘chance’ the Higher-Level paper.
An Gréasán do Mhúinteoirí Gaeilge, the subject association for Irish teachers, and Gael Linn also called for the plans to be shelved, warning there is "no educational or linguistic basis for this decision."
The Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) and the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland (ASTI) called for the concerns of teachers about the move to be addressed.
ASTI president Miriam Duggan made the point that while the move was billed as an “interim” measure, it wouldn’t be interim for the students sitting the Leaving Cert during this phase.
Liz Farrell, TUI President, said the change was “retrograde, regressive and will only have a detrimental impact on the acquisition of language skills for students".
It wasn’t just teachers to voice concerns; the Irish Second Level Students' Union (ISSU) also publicly said it couldn’t support the plan.
In January, the ISSU had yet to see a procedure for students who wished to repeat and re-sit their Paper 1, or a procedure for students who wished to drop from Higher to Ordinary level when they entered sixth year.
Keep in mind that students entering fifth year this September have also experienced major disruption to their education throughout the pandemic. For many students who opt not to take Transition Year, it also would mean sitting State exams three summers in a row.
On shelving the move, for now, Norma Foley said she listened to and reflected on the views provided by stakeholders. With such resounding opposition, it's hard to see how she couldn’t.
A key argument put forward by teachers is that they are experts in the classroom, and they know what will impact their students. Taking on board their feedback in this regard could be seen as commendable.
However, it does cast doubts on the more contentious elements of reform, mainly teacher-based assessment. Any move to introduce teacher-based assessments, in any form, will need wide support and buy-in from teachers themselves, otherwise, it's unlikely they will go ahead.
Compromise also runs the risk of complicating any planned reforms as can be seen with the new Junior Cycle. Key elements were opposed by the teaching unions, mainly plans for teachers to assess up to 40% of their own students’ marks.
An agreement was reached and now students complete classroom-based assessments (CBAs) but these do not go toward their official marks in a subject.
Many now see these in-class projects as an additional "stressor resulting in anxiety amongst students and teachers”, with teachers telling a recent NCCA study the new Junior Cycle has increased their workloads and is "misaligned" with the current Senior Cycle.
Norma Foley confirmed on Tuesday that talks will continue and that she now plans to take "the appropriate time" for further engagement with all concerned.
"I have been very clear that this would be a process which would be born of engagement and consultation with everyone," she said, adding that she was not timebound to a decision.
"We're taking the next number of months to take a look at it and see where we stand."
