Author Archives: evelynoconnor

Sample comparative link

You are asked the following question:

The society we encounter in a text can be deeply disturbing for the reader/viewer” – Discuss.

You write this as part of your answer:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo into betraying the allied cause. I was shocked to hear Renault comment of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting that it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too and get away with it. Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are utterly corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. One significant difference between these societies is that although the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), they are unwilling to intervene, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees stand together and challenge Strasser’s authority in the scene where they sing ‘La Marseilles’ to drown out the Nazis’ singing. However, despite the disgusting and disturbing lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society simply because it’s not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority.

Now, before I analyse the ingredients for you, can you answer the following questions:

  1. Identify the 6 linking phrases used above:
  2. Find 2 direct references to the Q asked & 2 implicit references to how I felt about these societies.
  3. Number the 6 key moments I referenced above.

Right, here it is again but with the different elements colour-coded:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo. I was shocked when Renault commented of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too. Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. One significant difference between the texts is that the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), yet are unwilling to do anything to stop it, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees come together to stand up to Strasser and challenge his authority in the scene where they sing La Marseillese. Despite the disgusting lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society as it’s not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority.

Now let’s analyse the different ingredients in the answer:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. = statement linking the texts, linking phrase (both), direct reference to the question asked.

In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo into co-operating. I was shocked when Renault commented of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting that it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too. = Key moments & examples from text 1

Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. = Make a comparison with key moment(s) from text 2

One significant difference between the texts (contrast/difference) is that the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), yet are unwilling to do anything to stop it, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees come together to stand up to Strasser and challenge his authority in the scene where they sing La Marseillese. (point out a significant difference between the texts/societies)

Despite the disgusting lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, which I found both disturbing and upsetting, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society as it is not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority. (final sentence gives personal response/preference)

ASTI members: Rock the Vote

KidsAs far back as I can remember my Dad was a returning officer for local, national and European elections. Neither he nor my mother ever attempted to influence how we voted but by God! did they insist that we vote. In truth, they didn’t have to do much insisting, as they raised us to believe that it was important to make our voices heard.

Of course we were warned not to become ’empty vessels that make most noise!’ Rather, we must consider carefully the issues at hand and then vote in whatever way our conscience and personal beliefs dictated. But in their book, and now in mine, the stupidest thing we could do was disengage, abstain from voting and allow others to decide what our future should look like. If we voted, and our side lost, we were free to whinge, secure in the knowledge that we had done all we could do to make our voice heard. But if we failed to vote we lost all whinging rights: if we didn’t care enough to cast our ballot, we had no right to an opinion after the fact.

It is testament to their parenting that they now have five grown up children all of whom react with horror at the thought of someone having a vote and not using it. It’s also testament to the independence of spirit they instilled in each of us that despite having grown up in the same house to the same parents, we rarely agree on anything!

Two months ago now I wrote an Open Letter to Ruairi Quinn identifying what I felt were the real reasons teachers felt drained, demoralised and defeated. It feels like a lifetime ago. I listed exploding class sizes and diminishing subject choice for students; vicious cuts to teacher numbers; the decimation of posts of responsibility alongside the mass proliferation of new initiatives; the insulting & utterly pointless way the Croke Park hours were being implemented and the lack of clarity and support around the new Junior Cycle.

Some 24,483 people read my letter so I guess you could say it struck a chord. Was the Minister among them? Who knows!?! He certainly never replied, which to my mind is quite rude. If he were in my English class I’d have a thing or two to teach him about communication, the first rule being that if someone takes the time to write to you, you should bloody well write back!

All of the issues I identified – posts of responsibility, Croke Park hours, Junior Cycle reform – have been addressed in some small way in the revised Haddington Road Agreement. None have been resolved. The issue of compulsory increased substitution and supervision (thereby reducing even further the time that is available to us to devote to our students; to extra-curricular activities; to pastoral care, class prep, subject planning, literacy and numeracy and integration of IT) remains exactly as it was before, except that those who weren’t doing it can opt out but this time they’ve to pay for the privilege of not doing something they never did and the rest of us have no choice but to do it for free. The CEC – the Central Executive Council have recommended a NO vote and it’s plastered over all of the documentation we have received at school.

Yet I find myself utterly convinced that voting NO to the revised proposals would be profoundly foolish and potentially very dangerous, not just for the teaching profession but for the entire public sector. So why do I feel like that and what, fundamentally, has changed?

Well I guess the fact that no other public sector union has rejected the deal is significant, whether we like it or not. We are alone in a barren desert, with very little public support, like a lone dog howling at the moon.

If we go on strike, can we really expect other public sector unions to support us, when they have taken their medicine – or should I say beating – and we have not? Meanwhile, most in the private sector just find us utterly comical. Given the awful treatment many of them are subjected to on a daily basis (what do you mean you can’t work 12 hr days? Do you really need lunch? No, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask you to relocate to China for three months – your pregnant wife and two young kids will be fine!) it’s hardly surprising.

Second of all is the fact that this government have proven themselves more than capable of following through on their threats. They passed emergency legislation as promised (FEMPI) to deal with us when we stood up to them for reneging on the original Croke Park Deal. If we vote no again, they will  cut payment for S&S anyway in the new year – they have made this abundantly clear – in which case if we refuse to do S&S unpaid, schools will close. Maybe this is what some people want, but I can’t pretend I have any stomach for it.

Now they are threatening compulsory redundancies (more bully boy tactics) if we again vote no. I have no doubt they will again follow through. Although by rights so-called Labour Minister Ruairi Quinn should be against this on principle, I’ve heard him threaten it enough times by now to believe that he has to follow through on his threat if we vote no, or else he becomes the proverbial boy who cried wolf and loses all credibility. I also think he actually sees no contradiction between his Labour roots and the fact that he may very well become the first Minister in the history of the state to introduce compulsory redundancies in the Public Sector. Why this surprises me I don’t know; by now it seems that anyone with any real Labour principles has already quit the party, while those that remain are happy to embrace a Neo-Liberal agenda – or worse still, they don’t even fully grasp what that is! (Google ‘Pasi Sahlberg GERM’ for more on the negative impact of Neo-Liberal policies on education systems globally). 

Irrespective of whether we vote yes or no, pay cuts have been implemented and will not be reversed so now the question becomes, which deal is the lesser of two evils – FEMPI or Haddington Road #2

If we vote yes, of course there are bitter pills to swallow in the form of

  1. continuing the 33 Croke Park hours – albeit with better differentiation from Sept 2014 onwards;
  2. unpaid & increased S&S – but as I understand it, it is only 6 hours more annually (from 37 to 43 hours) than the previous agreement irrespective of how many teachers opt in or out.
  3. fewer hours being available for part-time and subbing teachers due to changes in S&S and sick leave arrangements for existing staff.

Possibly the most significant one, however, is that once we sign up, we’re in. We cannot change our minds down the road about any of the details contained herein  as the agreement states “Strikes or other industrial action by trade unions, employees or employers are precluded in respect of any matters covered by this Agreement”. Ah, the irony, from the Government who changed their mind unilaterally about the Croke Park Agreement and told the rest of us to just suck it up!

However, there are also some very significant sweeteners

  1. Teachers in an over-quota position can be nominated for redeployment (a scheme which I hate by the way!) rather than redundancy (which is way worse!). [This is presuming the government mean what they say and will attempt to introduce redundancies if we vote NO again. Who knows, their word is worth little more than nothing if you ask me, in the context of their abandonment of the Croke Part agreement, but they tend to keep their word when it means getting their own way – in this case, firing people as a pathetic show of their power].
  2. Teachers who have served 3 years will get their CIDs backdated to Sept 2013 and if we sign up, CID eligibility after 3 years (instead of 4) will become standard. This still sucks, it just sucks less for the 29% of secondary teachers in casual contract based employment.  The panel for fixed-term teachers also improves conditions for this very vulnerable group in our schools (I was one of them not too long ago & still bear the scars of the experience).
  3. The gap between pre and post 2011 entrants will shrink from 10% to 7%. If you ask me different pay scales for new entrants should never have been accepted in the first place (thereby institutionalising the notion of yellow pack workers), but it is a significant improvement in their pay scales (not to Labour the point but I still find it utterly divisive & ridiculous that different pay scales based on the year you began teaching were EVER accepted)
  4. Increments due will be paid.
  5. A limited alleviation of the moratorium on posts of responsibility will be implemented to the tune of 300 additional posts (although in most cases, this will have a very limited impact in alleviating difficulties, as B post holders will most likely just move into A post positions, still leaving a void that cannot be filled).

There’s also some expert group talks yadda yadda yadda that to be honest I don’t have much faith in – an expert group on the issue of casualisation (they’ve ignored the advice of these groups in the past); discussions on fair rostering of S&S and on the best use of Croke Park hours. Only time will tell whether these talks make any real difference. The issue of the new Junior Cycle, we are told, is a separate issue, but again ‘talks’ are now on the table so that our concerns are at least presented to those in power.

Part of the deal specifies that no additional hours other than S&S and Croke Park hours will be required. Quite frankly, this made me scoff. I require many many hours of myself above and beyond the regular school day. I always have  demanded more of myself than is sane or reasonable because I believe in giving my students the best possible education I can offer them. It’s only a pity the government don’t have the same dedication to our students’ education and future. So I find it both insulting and patronising to suggest that the only hours I do outside of my regular working week are S&S and Croke Park. This may be true of a minority but it is not true of me, nor of the vast majority of teachers I know.

Finally, I think there is a much bigger picture here that a lot of people are missing.

We are alone in resisting the Haddington Road Agreement. If the government decide to make an example of us, we can strike and our schools can close and they can stop paying us and more talks can happen but what exactly do we hope to gain? If those talks fail the government may dig their heels in on compulsory redundancies. It would be easier now during a recession for the government to get public support for ‘less money being spent on public sector wages’ and of course they would do an expert PR job of concealing the negative impact on vital public services. The education of future generations to my mind should be a national priority but to hear certain politicians who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing speak you’d swear education was little more than an inconvenience, an irritating and exorbitant ‘cost’ for the ‘tax-payer’ (also known as the parents of the kids in the education system).  If this happens, down the line you can expect nurses and guards and social workers and civil servants to face the very same treatment. The trickle could easily become a flood.

Because when  as a politician you place no value on experience and commitment and community and see individuals only as ‘costs’ (the Neo-Liberal agenda in a nutshell) the ‘clever’ thing to do is to fire all of the experienced people who actually demand a living wage and hire instead yellow-pack workers who have no mortgage and no family to feed and no responsibilities, but who also have little in the way of experience. And you inevitably damage the system irreparably. Yet ultimately you don’t care, because it’s cheaper (the race to the bottom drags everybody down) and because you can put a list in your election manifesto promising to ‘fix’ what’s broken without ever admitting that you are the person who broke it in the first place.

That’s the bigger picture.

The stupidest thing you or I as teachers can do now is disengage, abstain from voting and allow others to decide what our future will look like. Be under no illusions: we are choosing between FEMPI and Haddington Road, not Haddington Road and nostalgia for the era before Croke Park hours.

Don’t be bullied, but do make an informed choice.

For the record, I’m not one of the teachers at risk of redundancy, so this post is not about furthering my own personal agenda. I am near the bottom of the seniority list but our school has lost so many English teachers in the past 5 years that I am and will be needed indefinitely into the future in our school. But I also know that this is just a quirk of fate, not a reward for hard work and dedication, which makes me very aware that ‘but for the grace of God go I’.  

Teachers who are low down the seniority list and a long way from retirement have the most to lose if the government mean what they say and are not just bluffing. I’m reliably informed that there are few, if any, teachers in this position on the Central Executive Council – the people within the ASTI who are recommending a NO vote. Are we willing to play roulette with their futures? That’s what each of us needs to decide…

So Rock the Vote.

If we vote, and our side loses, whichever side we choose, we are free to whinge, secure in the knowledge that we did all we could do to make our voices heard. But if we fail to vote we lose all whinging rights: if we don’t care enough to cast our ballot, we have no right to an opinion after the fact.

Edublog nominations

I’m like one of the three little pigs, getting in by the hair on my chinny chin chin – except, hold on, I don’t have any hair on my chin, nor do I ever plan to!

Anyway, the deadline is tonight, so here are my nominations for the edublog awards:

Best Individual Blog – levdavidovic.wordpress.com

Best Group Blog – newenglishblog.blogspot.ie

Best ed tech/ resource sharing blog – anseo.net

Best New Blog –  stpetersbrayblog.com

Best Teacher Blog – seomraranga.com

Best Individual Tweeter – @levdavidovic

Best Twitter Hashtag – #edchatie

Best Educational use of audio/video/visual/podcast – ansonprimaryschool.com

Lifetime Achievement Award – Donal O’Mahony (donalomahony.edublogs.org)

 

Twitter in the Classroom

*This post first appeared on www.congregation.ie on 24th November 2013

I’ve been experimenting with social media in education for a couple of years now. My students have created Facebook pages for Romeo & Juliet; they’ve written, recorded and promoted their own original songs via soundcloud and youtube; recently each of my Junior Cert students created a twitter account for a character in “To Kill A Mockingbird” and we’ve been tweeting the trial as we read it in class (a brilliant idea I got from my longtime twitter buddy @levdavidovic).

It’s been powerful and positive on many levels. Watching them morph Juliet’s status from ‘single’ to ‘it’s complicated’ to ‘in a relationship’ to ‘engaged’ to ‘married’ and palpably feeling their despair as it ultimately all led to ‘RIP’ has been fascinating, particularly as they register that this all happened in just 3 days! This led indirectly to a lengthy D.M.C. on the relationship between suicide and selfishness (I have it on reliable teenage authority that D.M.C. stands for ‘Deep & Meaningful Conversations’ which they also tell me, are, like, sooo a feature of my classroom!). Ironically then the very social media which has contributed to so many teen suicides can also be a powerful tool for engaging with the issue in a very real way.

For their projects I insisted that each status update be accompanied by a relevant quote and this led to a deep engagement with Shakespeare’s language, so it wasn’t just about messing about on social media (so I could be ‘down with the kids’), it was actually about challenging them, pushing them into the ‘zone of proximal development’ which is where real learning happens. They also used the Facebook pages as a handy revision tool when exams were looming; they came to see these characters as real people; and they’ve written in a much more engaged and insightful way about Romeo & Juliet and the choices they made than previous groups who didn’t get down and dirty with the text but who, in many cases, simply swallowed and regurgitated ‘expert’ opinions on the play.

There have been challenges though. Lots of challenges. Take the twitter project for example. We began by setting up our twitter profiles, which took a lot longer than I anticipated and which confirmed for me what I’ve long suspected; that the digital native / digital immigrant concept is a simplistic load of crap. Some of my students are self professed twitter experts; others were all fingers and thumbs and sighs of exasperation. We also learnt a lot about the impact of publishing public rather than private statements online; because we were tweeting as if we were characters in the Deep South of Alabama, one student used the word ‘nigger’ in her character’s twitter bio and then got promptly freaked out by another student who told her people would think she was racist.

I reassured her that:

– she was tweeting as a character, not as herself

– her account was new so no one knew she existed! And if ever something happened online that she was uncomfortable with she should immediately tell someone (on reflection, I should have shown her how to take a screen grab) and I also reminded her that she had the power to simply delete the account!

At this point we all learnt how to ‘protect’ our tweets and we’ve been privately tweeting the trial since. It’s been a great learning experience – for them and me – but it is a shame the sense of engagement with the ‘real’ world has been lost. Ultimately when we’re done tweeting we’ll most likely make the accounts public so we can share the experience (and the hashtag) with some of my many English teachers twitter friends, and by extension share it with their class groups.

At the end of the week, I conducted an impromptu survey, which consisted of the following:

Twitter questionnaire

The replies have been extremely varied and seriously eye-opening. I’m only sorry I didn’t conduct an online survey – if I had I’d now have some lovely pie charts and graphs to share with you. Instead, it was a ‘grab a scrap of paper’ kinda thang, as the last five minutes of class flew past (I never feel like I have enough time with my students but that’s a story for another day). Anyway, in the spirit of the Eurovision, here are the results of the student jury:

INTERNET ACCESS: 66% have v.good or good internet; 15% mentioned that it can be very slow or only works in certain rooms in the house; and 19% have poor or no internet access.

COMPUTER ACCESS: 65% have access to a computer; 31% have access to a computer only sometimes because it’s shared; 4% had no access to a computer.

COMPUTER SKILLS: …[and believe me, I know this is the world’s most unscientific survey – ‘skills’ could mean anything – but I just wanted to get a general sense of their level of comfort using technology] 23% described themselves as confident; 54% felt they were ‘ok’ at using a computer, with some leaving out the ‘a bit scared’ addendum and others inserting and underlining it; 15% only use it to buy things and go on Facebook; and 8% described themselves as having ‘no skills’, with one student describing her computer skills as ‘laughable’.

TWITTER SKILLS: 27% are twitter experts; 50% are getting to grips with it; 19% are slowly learning and one student (4% in this sample) still feels clueless!

MULTITASKING: 39% love multitasking; 57% find it ok and 4% find it really hard.

PARTICIPATION / ATTENTION: Here the responses were much more nuanced. 58% said that it helped them to pay attention and many also included that they loved having a job to do. One student (who’s normally quite giddy) said “I feel like I’m paying way more attention”. Another said “It’s fine for now but I wouldn’t like to do it for the whole book”. One commented “It helps me pay attention cause if I don’t tweet it’s noticed”. Another said ‘It helps me to understand the story better’.

Meanwhile, 8% really didn’t enjoy the experience and felt like they were missing out on the storyline. The remaining 34% gave really interesting feedback – one said she read ahead every night (even though it wasn’t assigned for homework – I’m thinking maybe it should have been!) so she’d be prepared for the tweet up the next day. One said it was ‘fun and different’ but she was anxious about missing out on the storyline.

Quite a few felt ‘distracted’ but really liked having a job to do.

In the other comments section, one comment really stood out: “spending time teaching people to use the internet is annoying – it’s 2013!” (this was underlined!). Embarrassingly, I feel some of this sentiment may have come from me, as I did find myself astounded – and frustrated at times – at the amount of time it took to set up what I considered to be a really straightforward class project. I now need to find a way to differentiate so that those who are enjoying the experience continue to benefit and those who are finding it more of a hindrance don’t feel they ‘have’ to keep going. Ultimately, it was also a steep learning curve for me: it made me stop and think and question the assumptions I was carrying around with me about their access to and confidence with technology. As far as I’m concerned, that can only be a good thing, for them and for me!

ps I also asked two further questions the next day but left the room and got one of the students to count the answers because otherwise I felt I wouldn’t get an honest response. The question was “Did you look at other websites in class because you could once you had wi-fi on your phone?” The answer was yes from 35% of them which I was shocked by, but then the students asked me to clarify the question. Did I mean in the set up time while they were waiting for class to get going or while we were reading/tweeting the trial. I said I didn’t care if they were on wi-fi as the class were getting settled as long as they were on task once we got going, so really I just wanted to know how many of them were browsing websites other than twitter when they were supposed to be on twitter and on task. This figure then dropped to 17% and they said it was jut now and then, not all the time. Also, of the 5 students who said they had been distracted enough to look at other sites during class time, only one of them had not read the book in full already. I also had an interesting chat with our principal about my findings and she observed that lots of the time in a traditional classroom kids are doodling, or daydreaming to looking out the window, so not being on task is not exactly something new. I guess it was just weird knowing that while most of them were loving it, a tiny minority were faking engagement with the technology…

 

 

 

 

 

 

Games for learning…

It’s not easy to be succinct. Sometimes it’s easier to just waffle on instead of getting promptly to the point and moving on. With this in mind, I’d like to recommend some board games that force you to be brief, that challenge you to think critically and that demand creativity and imagination – all skills students need to have in abundance.

Balderdash

 

The first is a bluffing game. Each person takes it in turns to be the card master. You choose a card, select the category that corresponds to where you are on the board, then read out a prompt (eg. Law – “In Princeton, New Jersey, it is a crime for two people to…“) and everyone scribbles down what they consider to be a plausible answer.

Then the card master collects up the answers, reads them all out, including the answer printed on the card (but they’ll have written it out on paper so no-one knows which is real and which is fake) and everyone bets on what they think is the ‘real’ answer. If you guess correctly, you move forward two spaces – but what’s far more fun is if that you also move forward one space every time someone guesses that your bullish*t answer is the real one.

The beauty of this game is that the real answers – although true – are always completely ridiculous, so the more ridiculous and absurd your answer is, the more likely it is that people will buy it – and the more people who choose your answer, the more likely you are to win the game!

Here are a few examples from each category:

Law: guess the ending…

“In Princeton, New Jersey, it is a crime…. for two people to slurp soup”

“In Munich, Germany, it is illegal for young women wearing bikinis to…. play rock and roll music if they are wrestling in a pool of mud” 

People: guess what they’re ‘famous’ for:

Charles Osborne? He was a pig farmer who could not stop hiccoughing for 68 years.

Daisy & Violet Hilton? They were siamese twins joined at the hip who developed successful musical careers playing jazz saxophone and piano!

Initials – guess what they stand for:

I. S.C.C.- International Smurf Collectors Club

W.F.P.F.C. – Worldwide Fair Play for Frogs Committee

B.R.S. – Brotherhood of Railway Signalmen

Movies – guess the plot from the title:

The Devil Bat” – 1940’s horror film about a deranged doctor who trains his giant bat to kill people who are wearing a certain shaving lotion.

This Could Be the Night” – Romantic melodrama about a prim and proper schoolteacher who starts work in a nightclub owned by a gangster.

The Day the Fish Came Out” – Sci-fi satire about a plane carrying nuclear warheads that crash lands on a Mediterranean island. Starring Candice Bergen.

Utterly silly but great craic, especially if you’ve got a bunch of witty people with wacky imaginations playing.

Two other board games that ask you to think quickly (but which demand perhaps a less quirky imagination) are Articulate and the brilliant Irish game 30 seconds, which is a variation involving an egg timer and questions specifically geared towards an Irish audience. Might make a good Christmas present for someone!

Articulate

30 seconds