LOUISE HOLDENexamines the prospects for the Junior Cert exam. Is it the beginning of the end?
SO WHAT’S THE FUTURE FOR THE JUNIOR CERT?
Minister Batt O’Keeffe will receive proposals for a reformed Junior Cert for Christmas.
SO WHAT IS HE LIKELY TO FIND UNDER THE TREE?
The NCCA will present a “big picture” review of the Junior Cert exam, so anyone waiting for specific details on subjects or assessment will be disappointed. The proposal will almost certainly name-check the “Education 3.0” concept – the buzzword of international education theorists. The idea is that the Victorian education system (1.0) and its reformed daughter (2.0) must now be replaced with an entirely new kind of education that rethinks learning entirely. Expect an overview.
WILL THERE BE NEW SUBJECTS?
UCD recently called for the inclusion of Mandarin Chinese on the cycle, and business groups have been calling for ICT as a core subject for years.
However, the proposed review will almost certainly call for a reduction in the number of subjects rather than a whole host of new ones. Current Junior Cert students take an average of 12 distinct subjects with no cross-curricular elements.
IS THE JUNIOR CERT EXAM DONE FOR?
Very unlikely. The more plausible outcome is a much reduced menu of exams that are complemented by continuous assessment throughout the cycle.
How the department negotiates that with the teachers’ unions, especially the Asti, is anybody’s guess; the union has sworn against the introduction of teacher-led assessments of their own pupils. There is also the problem of a conservative public. Middle-class parents want a terminal exam as a dry run for the Leaving Cert.
CAN WE EXPECT AN EXTENSION OF PRIMARY SCHOOLING?
This is a possibility. In a review of the Junior Cert published in 2004, researchers flagged “the negative effects that curriculum discontinuity (between primary and post-primary) can have on students’ academic progress over the course of first year.”
There is a widely held view that the Junior Cert cycle undoes much of the good achieved in primary school, especially in areas such as subject blending and active learning. The NCCA will likely propose a revision of “chronological configuration”, leading to a nine-year primary cycle and a two-year junior cycle. The opposite may also be touted – the introduction of the Junior Cert cycle in sixth class.
WILL THERE BE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN TEACHER- TRAINING?
Definitely. In consultations carried out by the NCCA in preparation for this review, it has become clear that assessment is a neglected area in teacher- training in Ireland. Whether the unions like it or not, teachers will have to learn to carry out assessments. Other changes are almost certainly in the pipeline for teachers; there are strong suggestions that the notion of subject specialism will take a hit in proposed reform.
HOW ABOUT A THREE-YEAR TRANSITION CYCLE?
This is the ideal outcome, but it won’t happen. The Transition Year model has proved very successful in opening up the learning experience of students who are lucky enough to be offered the programme in their schools. Another study by the ESRI, published in 2005, found that students who take part in Transition Year achieve higher Leaving Certificate exam grades and are more likely to go on to higher education.
A well-run Transition Year features the following elements: co-ordinated activities and co-operation among teachers; a varied programme content that exposes students to a range of subjects; exposure to the world of work; and the use of innovative teaching methods and forms of assessment.
This sounds like a wishlist for a new Junior Cert cycle, but it would be too expensive to implement and would require a complete overhaul of post- primary schooling and teacher- training. It would also leave the Leaving Cert out on an old-fashioned limb.
IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF THE ‘A’ STUDENT?
Maybe not, but the NCCA will probably suggest a de-emphasis on academics. The ESRI Junior Cert review of 2002 found that more than 40 per cent of teachers expressed concern that the first- year curriculum is unsuitable for lower-ability students.
The NCCA is likely to call for a Junior Cert that offers access to more practical subjects and that rewards team-working, problem- solving and creativity. However, practical subjects such as woodwork and home economics are much more expensive to provide than traditional “chalk and talk” subjects such as maths. This will certainly militate against them in the eyes of the Exchequer.
