Comments for Think for Yourself

Comment on We are star-stuff: teaching about the elements by Lisa

Lisa — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 13:51:26 +0000

Great piece Noel, This would be one of my favorite bits to teach. Another really nice video my class seem to enjoy is episode 2 of Wonders of the Universe entitled ‘Stardust’. The full episode is worth showing to both juniors and seniors but you can get short clips on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEw6X2BhIy8

Comment on Naming of Parts, by Henry Reed by Naming of Parts, by Henry Reed « Think for Yourself | My Blog

Naming of Parts, by Henry Reed « Think for Yourself | My Blog — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:14:56 +0000

[...] here to see the original: Naming of Parts, by Henry Reed « Think for Yourself This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged adapted, author, education, haved-included, [...]

Comment on We need to take responsibility for our own professional development by ozymandias1

ozymandias1 — Sat, 22 Oct 2011 12:40:07 +0000

Hi Karen,
are you still teaching in Scotland or somewhere else – if somewhere else what system do you have now?
Back to the open door policy in Scotland – is this down to indivual schools or is it a top-down policy?
Is it mostly in Science or in all departments?

Thanks for replying,

NOel

Comment on We need to take responsibility for our own professional development by Karen

Karen — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:51:03 +0000

I am delighted to see this blog! I trained and taught in Scotland where most teachers had a open door policy. It was a brilliant system. I would observe classes I taught being taught by other teachers or teachers in different subject with curriculum that over-lapped with my own. Mainly I observed teachers who were simply good!
The key is for they observer to remember they are observing not assessming and they should be reflecting on their own practise!

Comment on Leaving Cert Physics: Section A Questions and Solutions by conor

conor — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 13:30:35 +0000

I’m getting a 404 error on that link, is there another way that I could get it?

Comment on Junior Cert Science revision: the experiments by Will

Will — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:54:42 +0000

“I suppose because these are the equivalent of GCSE level they are trying to expose students to a wide range of material.”
Arghh, but this is pointless (as you know), does it not occur to any of the people that write these syllabus’ that perhaps studying a few things in depth would give students an *understanding* of a concept vs a regurgitated statement that they don’t really understand. One example from my biology GCSE; How does alcohol lead to dehydration? It reduces the production of ADH in the hypothalamus. We were never told what ADH was or stood for, neither what the hypothalamus was. Which leaves only the most motivated/interested students to go and google the topic, otherwise it’s just useless information. It’s just tragic really. I can say that I really don’t think I learnt anything of use in any of the science GCSEs, bar some of chemistry which has been useful (moles calculations, balancing equations and group 1 and group 7 characteristics), biology was the worst, physics had one or two interesting/useful bits.
Oh dear, I seem to have gone off on a rant. I do seem to feel nowadays, why bother, what use is it? But then I go and learn stuff out of college which then ignites the spark of passion again.

Comment on Junior Cert Science revision: the experiments by ozymandias1

ozymandias1 — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:44:39 +0000

Hard to disagree with that summation. A colleague (John Hegarty) posted something similar about this recently:

I think one of the difficulties we face when considering change is that we as teachers are in many ways the measure of success in our existing system. If there is a ladder of achievement then we are pretty near the top of it having successfully navigated the Inter Cert, Leaving Cert, primary degree and H. Dip. Some have gone on to do other diplomas and masters degrees and there are even a couple of Ph.D.s knocking about. As teachers within the education system, the next rung up the ladder would be lecturing at 3rd level and thats about as far up the ladder as you can go. The system that we succeeded in is pretty much the same system in place now and I think it is hard for us to conceive of any other. Over the years as guiding hands in our education system we have become excellent at processing students through this system and while I’m pretty sure young folk today are no cleverer than the folk that came before, the grades they are getting rise year on year to the extent that many of us might have struggled to get into third level today with the Leaving Certs we got way back in 19xx . The best teachers we had were the exemplars we emulate today and again it is hard for us to imagine things being done any other way to the same kind of standards and with the same level of rigor. We have an inclination to believe that changing our systems will inevitably involve a decline in standards.
From http://cesi.ie/digiteach-secondlevelreform

Comment on Junior Cert Science revision: the experiments by ozymandias1

ozymandias1 — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:40:57 +0000

I suppose because these are the equivalent of GCSE level they are trying to expose students to a wide range of material. it’s just as you say though – the amount of learning/understanding is minimal and very superficial.

would be nice if we teachers became more vocal about it rather than passively accepting it all.

But that’s for another day . . .

Comment on Junior Cert Science revision: the experiments by Chris Meudec

Chris Meudec — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:57:51 +0000

Love the last comment but only in a sad way
Why does the Irish exam setting system persevere with that kind of exams?
Is it because they are set by existing teachers who were the best at those kind of things twenty years ago?

All the best

Comment on Junior Cert Science revision: the experiments by Will

Will — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:35:54 +0000

“And remember – real Science bears little or no resemblance to the rubbish you have to learn for this exam, so try not to be put off by the subject.”
As someone taking A-level phys/chem/bio. I have to say that 45 experiments sounds like an awful exercise of futility, I mean what’s the point of it? At least in my syllabus’ they teach are some _marginally_ useful things, though I have to say there is a decent amount of filler…
I enjoy reading your blog, keep posting.