The world is changing, and the Irish education system needs to change too. The junior cycle reform will help equip our children to become the articulate, responsible, skilled, critical- thinking, globally engaged citizens we need them to be.
The need for change is long overdue. It needs to start now. As with any change, there will be learning curves. Will we get it absolutely right first time around? Probably not. The intent behind the reform is to lead to greater student engagement and learning. Will it?
The evidence, both national and international, says yes, it will, as long as we refrain from maintaining the absolute dominance over the curriculum of the exam. We know this not only because of research but also because some schools in Ireland, including our own schools, have already implemented aspects of the changes in different ways.
The result is students who are happier, more engaged independent learners; students who become more creative thinkers who are goal- and task-focused; and students who learn more of what they need to know in ways that enhance further learning. In schools that have modelled this approach, not only has it enhanced the teaching and learning experience, but these students have the skills necessary to manage their subsequent learning.
Are teachers so vehemently opposed to change in the direction of greater freedom of curriculum choice, less exam pressure, more assessment for learning and less assessment of learning? Certainly not, in our experience. Indeed, changes in this direction have already been implemented. The Minister for Education has listened to the concerns of teachers and has responded to a surprising extent.
We understand the concerns of teachers about proper consultation. Good curriculum reform works only if there is consultation and a participatory approach. We also understand the concerns of teachers about the need for adequate time and training if these reforms are to work. Teachers need the time and support to move from one model to another, and they need high-quality training in new methods, in curriculum development and in assessment.
There is also a need for better infrastructure and greater investment in information and communication technology. We understand all these concerns. We do not understand, however, why we are not now moving forward to address these issues. We are in danger of losing this opportunity of nurturing the culture of change already present in our schools.
As school principals, we trust teachers to correct and mark their students’ work and to do so in a way that is fair, equitable and that leads to further learning. Assessing learning is at the core of the practice of teaching; external moderation and verification of this assessment will help to ensure objectivity and comparability between schools and throughout the system.
The proposals on the table – with only 40 per cent left for in- school assessment – are based on trusting teachers’ experience and expertise, and this is already happening in schools every day. Far from a huge change in the system, this is hardly any change at all.
Moving away from the logic of a rigid, high-stakes, State-verified exam will allow schools and teachers to determine the content that best suits their students, while maintaining standards through moderation, spot-checking and peer and external verification.
This might sound vague. That’s because we all know what an exam looks like but many of us don’t know what moderation is. However, in those education systems – such as in Scotland, New Zealand some Australian states and in Ontario, Canada – that have moved from a high-stakes exam to using school-based assessment and moderation, teachers have been freed up, while students have been liberated to focus on necessary learning rather than learning to the test. The international evidence shows, counterintuitively, that a system of moderation is more reliable, more accurate and fairer.
We need to move on junior cycle reform immediately. If not, teachers, parents and Irish society will lose out. Parents will have to continue supporting their children through the useless pressure of preparing for a State examination that is unfit for purpose. Students will lose the most, however. Reverting to the old system will mean a diminution in the creativity, vision and engagement in learning at the heart of the reform. We cannot continue to prop up a system that does such injustice to learning and engagement.
We owe it to the students in second-level education to implement reform in the direction of the new junior cycle. Anything less will lead back to the current system, and that is unacceptable because it cannot provide for the learning needs of Irish students in this century.
Treasa Leahy is principal at Mercy Secondary School, Inchicore; Pat McKenna is principal at Pobalscoil Neasáin, Baldoyle; and Liam Wegimont is principal at Mount Temple Comprehensive, all in Dublin
