IOTI Transitions by Waterford Institute of Technology

Transitions

The Transition from Second to Third level education in Ireland: considerations, perspectives and proposed actions from the Institute of Technology sector

Contents 1. Background

2. The Technology Sector and Transition 2.1 Programme portfolios and admitting decisions 2.2 Points scores in context 2.3 Access and opportunity 2.4 Diverse Entry Mechanisms: CAO Round A, Direct Entry and FETAC qualifications

3 3 5 9 10

3. Key Transitions Issues: The Institute of Technology Perspective 3.1 Broader Entry Routes 3.2 Compulsory calculation of points for English and Maths; Bonus Points and Recoupling of Cognate Disciplines 3.3 Foundation skills and the First-Year Experience 3.4 Access and the broader Transition experience 3.5 Information

13 13 16 18 22 23

4. Conclusion and summary of actions to be undertaken by the Institutes of Technology 25 5. Appendices

1. Background In September 2011, the HEA and NCCA held a national conference entitled ‘Transition or Transaction? Moving from Second to Third Level Education in Ireland’.1 The purpose of the conference was to explore and identify ways of addressing a number of concerns that had been raised previously by academics, employers, the media and the general public about the coupling of the Leaving Certificate examination to the selection process for second level students entering higher education. In broad terms, these concerns are focussed on two interconnected areas.2 The first relates to the implications for the senior-cycle curriculum of the Leaving Certificate exam being the main determinant of access to higher education for second level students. There is a perceived ‘back wash’ effect arising from this, in which certain practices and behaviours in third level – in particular, those associated with the demands and pressures of competitive entry into the system – impact in a negative way on the learning experience in the second level system. The ‘back wash’ determines student behaviour, leading many to concentrate on maximising their points score in the Leaving Certificate exam for the purposes of securing entry to particular third level programmes. This is evident in the way students choose their Leaving Certificate subjects, and the manner in which they study them.

1. On the conference generally see http://www.transition.ie/ 2. For a fuller discussion see A. Hyland, Entry to Higher Education in Ireland in the 21st Century. Discussion Paper for the NCCA/ HEA seminar to be held on 21st Sep 2011 (2011), available at http://www. transition.ie/files/Entry_ to_Higher_Education_ in_Ireland_in_the_21st_ Century%20.pdf 3. ‘From Transaction to Transition: Outcomes of the Conference on the Transition from Second to Third-Level Education in Ireland’, available at http://www.transition. ie/files/HEA_NCCA_ Transitions.pdf

The second, related area of concern is the perceived limiting effect that approaches to learning in second level have on those students’ third level learning experience. Driven to some extent, though not exclusively, by the ‘back wash’ effect of the ‘points race’, there is a concern that there is an undue focus on the achievement of exam results, rather than on broader curricular aims, and a consequent and pedagogically unsound emphasis on ‘rote learning’. As a result, some second level students do not acquire the depth and breadth of learning outcomes that are necessary to enable them to participate and perform at an optimal level in higher education. Arising out of the discussion on these issues in the conference, a suite of sixteen proposed ameliorative actions was identified by the HEA and NCCA, and published in December 2011.3 These included eight proposed actions requiring action by the schools sector; and eight proposed actions that require the participation to a greater or lesser degree of higher education institutions. The sixteen recommendations are set out in Appendix 1 of this document. In September 2012, the Department of Education and Skills assumed a coordinating role in relation to ‘Transitions reform’. A Transitions Reform Steering Group, comprised of the key stakeholders, was established under the chairmanship of the Department. The Group has been tasked with coordinating further research into the issues, considering and discussing proposals for change, and developing an agreed implementation plan.

The Institutes of Technology have been participants in and active contributors to the ‘Transitions’ debate since it was ‘formalised’ in the 2011 conference. IOTI provided a submission with proposals ahead of the Transition Conference in September 2011,4 and is also participating on the Transitions Reform Steering Group. The present document is intended to be a further contribution to the debate, and also to the development of a sustainable implementation plan. In the context of IOTI’s response to the proposed actions, the paper raises some issues that are germane to the debate from the perspective of the Technology sector, and proposes a series of actions that would address some of the ‘Transition’ issues from that same perspective.

4. ‘Submission by Institutes of Technology Ireland to the Department of Education and Skills on Higher Education Admissions’, available at http:// www.transition.ie/files/ IOTIpoints180911.pdf

2. The Technology Sector and Transition The Institutes of Technology approach the issue of the transition into third level with two essential and inter-linked considerations in mind. First, from a purely institutional perspective, there is the decision to admit a student to a particular programme. Second, from the learner perspective, there is the obligation to ensure that that student gets every opportunity to succeed in the programme. There is both a philosophical underpinning to these considerations, and a practical trade-off. At the very heart of the Technology sector’s mission is a commitment to widening and increasing access to higher education, and the institutes have been hugely successful in this regard. In 2011-12, the Technology sector accounted for some 62% of full-time undergraduate mature student entrants into the higher education system, and for 78% of the Springboard (Labour Market Activation) places provided by publicly-funded higher education institutions.5 In addition, the Technology sector also accounts for significant numbers of students admitted on the basis of further education (FETAC) qualifications; and, in terms of the CAO points distribution (see section 2.1 below), it admits a very different cohort of leaving certificate students to the cohort admitted by the traditional universities. In managing this mission, the Institutes of Technology make a conscious trade-off between maintaining high CAO points for their programmes in favour of greater diversity. This diversity, however, brings with it additional challenges to the first year experience.

2.1 Programme portfolios and admitting decisions The Transition Conference discussion paper highlighted the ten-fold expansion that has taken place in the number of students entering higher education since the 1960s; and the trebling of the total number of programmes on offer since the 1990s.6 Much of this expansion has been in the Technology sector which in 2011 accounted for 47% of all new entrants to higher education. Over the five years to 2011 the sector experienced a growth rate of 25% compared to growth of 17.5% for all higher education.7

5. Data supplied by HEA Statistics section. 6. Hyland, Entry to Higher Education in Ireland in the 21st Century, pp. 2-3. 7. V. Patterson, ‘An Analysis of CAO acceptances 2011’ (Unpublished HEA Report, 2012).

Part of the explanation of this growth is accounted for by the unique characteristics of the portfolios of programmes in the institutes, which are often described as close to market and industry focused. Employment rates among graduates of the institutes are relatively high overall with between 85-94% of graduates actively engaged postqualification. While demand for Level 6 and Level 7 programmes has been declining, current acceptances are down 16% from 2002-3, learners accepting places on these programmes still account for 28% of the total acceptances. The Institutes’ portfolio is heavily influenced by changing trends in industries and technology. Much of the programme expansion has been in professional fields, ICT and biopharma, reflecting the changing demographic nature of employment needs. Programmes therefore tend to differentiate themselves based on regional and national employment characteristics.

A second unique characteristic of the sector is the ladder of opportunities it offers to learners to enter and exit higher education at different levels and multiple stages. As well as offering entry to Level 6, Level 7 and Level 8 programmes, students can seamlessly progress from one level to the other depending on need, ability and motivation. Offering denominated entry routes at multiple levels opens access in a number of ways: â&#x20AC;˘ it matches student expectations with programme outcomes and durations; â&#x20AC;˘ it facilitates variation in pedagogical approaches and support services to different student cohorts, thus improving the first year experience. The benefit of widening access on the CAO points system is clearly seen in the admission decisions made by Institutes of Technology. Figure 1 below shows the distribution of acceptances within the Technology sector (excludes DIT) compared to all higher education students for the current 2012-3 intake. This table reveals that the Technology sector accounts, primarily, for acceptances up to c. 300 CAO points, while other parts of the higher education system dominate above 360 CAO points. The modal score for Institutes of Technology is 305 points, while for all higher education institutions it is 405 points. The graph clearly shows that the Technology sector is opening access to those who would not otherwise access higher education. The fit of the Institutesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; portfolio with the needs of the learner is also highlighted by the popularity of the programmes with learners. A 2011 report on acceptances showed that first preference acceptances in the institutes (including DIT) was 66.9% of total acceptances, which is higher than the average of overall first preference acceptances at 61.3%, and university first preference acceptances at 56.3%.

Figure 1: CAO Net Acceptances 2012 frequency within points bands.

2.2 Points scores in context The points score for all entrants also needs to be contextualized. For 2012/3 entry, 30% of candidates scored above the modal score of 405 points. Indeed, when the points â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;raceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is considered in this context, the competition for places is among a small number of candidates and actually occurs within a small number of programme areas. Table 1 shows the distribution of CAO points across all leaving certificate candidates for 2012. The points distribution year on year remains reasonably consistent.

Table 1: Distribution of points across all Leaving Certificate candidates, 20128 CAO Points in excess of:

Number of Candidates

% of Candidates

550

1658

3.2

500 450 400 350 300 250 200

5191 10759 17586 24617 30756 35875 40314

9.9 20.5 33.4 46.8 58.5 68.2 76.7

It is clear from Table 1 that few candidates reach high points level, with only 3.2% of candidates reaching 550 points or above, while less than 10% of candidates reach 500 points or above. However, it is these point levels that receive the most media attention. Given that there is a national target to achieve a participation rate of 72 % of the relevant age cohort in higher education by 2020,9 the third level sector needs to be capable of absorbing candidates achieving points scores in the region of 200 points and lower. This is a significant issue for the learning environment and the engagement of first year students. Tables 2 and 3 show the lowest entry range of points for each Institute of Technology (including DIT) and Table 4 shows the corresponding figures for universities. Over 65% of all Level 8 programmes will admit students who score between 250 and 345 points. Less than 9% of students required over 400 points to enter their chosen programme, compared to 66.7% requiring the same points score in the universities. At Levels 6 and 7 the points cut-off to over 80% of programmes is less than 300. It is clear from these tables that entry to the Institutes of Technology closely reflects the pattern of point scores achieved by learners nationally and that there is consistency across the sector in admitting diverse learners.

8. Source: CAO data 9. Higher Education Authority, National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education 2008-2013 (HEA, Dublin, 2008), p. 12, available at http://www.hea.ie/ files/files/file/National_ Access_Plan_2008-2013_ (English).pdf

Table 2: Minimum entry points for Level 8 Institutes of Technology programmes 2012 by points band. 10 <199

200249

250299

300349

350399

Athlone IT

IT Carlow Cork IT Dublin Institute of Technology Dun Laoghaire IADT IT Blanchardstown IT Tallaght Dundalk IT Galway-Mayo IT Letterkenny IT Limerick IT IT Sligo IT Tralee Waterford Institute of Technology

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 1 7 8 0 3 1 4 5 0 0

10 11 13 1 2 3 0 1 7 10 7 3 11

14 15 19 2 4 2 11 2 1 10 2 8 16

1 2 16 1 1 4 2 6 2 2 0 0 6

1 0 9 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 1

1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

27 29 62 5 14 17 15 14 12 26 14 13 34

Total

107

292

IoT

400450+ Total 449

Table 3: Minimum entry points for Level 6/7 Institutes of Technology programmes 2012 by points band.11 <199

200249

250299

300349

350399

Athlone IT

0 1 5 0 8 4 6 18 21 18 17 4 0

15 14 7 1 3 10 5 6 6 13 6 13 18

9 8 7 1 0 5 3 8 0 7 3 1 3

4 6 9 1 4 1 4 6 1 3 0 4 3

0 2 2 0 1 2 1 3 1 0 1 0 2

1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

29 31 31 3 16 22 19 41 29 41 27 23 26

Total

115

126

367

IoT

10. Source: CAO data; excludes programmes with portfolios or other additional requirements. 11. Source: CAO data; excludes programmes with portfolios or other additional requirements.

400450+ Total 449

Table 4: minimum entry points for University level 8 programmes 2012 by points band. 12 300349

350399

400449

450499

500549

550+

Total

University College Cork

Dublin City University Trinity College Dublin University College Dublin NUI Galway University of Limerick NUI Maynooth

5 0 6 11 21 2 49

13 6 7 7 18 16 75

19 8 11 22 16 13 105

10 15 15 9 7 9 73

5 19 8 4 2 5 51

1 8 6 0 1

53 56 53 53 65 45 372

University

The discipline of entry of learners also has a distinct profile within the Technology sector, with a strong emphasis on modern sectors such as ICT and Services, where the majority of entrants to higher education enter through the Technology sector. Table 5 shows that almost 70% of computing entrants, almost all services entrants and almost 62% of engineering entrants do so through the Technology sector, underpinning the important and successful role the sector plays in supporting national skill strategies. Indeed this strength is evident in the recent labour market activation calls, where the sector accounted for some 78% of the total allocation of places amongst publicly â&#x20AC;&#x201C;funded institutions. Table 5: Discipline of entry to new applicants to higher education 2011/12 Discipline

IoTs

All HEIs

% IoTs

Education

1,434

3.3%

2,179 4,520 1,539 1,859 2,079 965 411 2,751 2,765 0 47

8,344 9,312 4,445 2,678 3,375 1,152 835 5,886 2,780 454 170

26.1% 48.5% 34.6% 69.4% 61.6% 83.8% 49.2% 46.7% 99.5% 0.0% 27.6%

Arts & Humanities Social Science, Business and Law Science Computing Engineering Construction Agriculture and Vet Healthcare Services Combined and Other Basic / broad general programmes 12. Source: CAO data; excludes programmes with portfolios or other additional requirements.

2.3 Access and opportunity The Technology sector is also characterized by the diversity of its learner cohort. A unique feature of the sector is the ladder of progression system where learners can move from the Higher Certificate (Level 6) to Ordinary Bachelor (Level 7) to Honours Bachelor (Level 8), and increasingly to Master (Level 9) or Doctoral Degree (Level 10). This has proved highly attractive, particularly to under-represented categories of learners. In this context, it is not surprising that the sector accounts for 54% of all flexible learners in higher education, 62% of all mature new entrants into higher education and 60.2% of all undergraduate part-time learners enrolled in higher education. Similarly, there is a distinctive socio-economic learner profile within the sector, with above average intakes of the skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled categories; and substantially lower numbers from the employers, managers and professionals socio-economic groups. Figure 2 below charts first year intake in 2011-12 by socio-economic group against the mean for all of higher education. The sectorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s performance in attracting applicants from the lower socio-economic group is very evident, as indeed is the under-representation of higher socio-economic categories. The likelihood of entrants to the Technology sector coming from a socio-economic background that has not experienced previous generations of higher education is therefore high, and this creates the need for cultural and pedagogical supports to be embedded within the first year experience if the transition to higher education is to achieve higher success rates. Figure 2: 2011-12 CAO intake by socio-economic group

The age profile of entrants to the sector also demonstrates the sectorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to attract mature learners and learners returning to higher education. The sector accounts for a significantly higher proportion of students in older age brackets. While 41% of the 19 or under category entering higher education attend IoTs, the rate rises dramatically to over 60% for older categories. Table 6: Entrants to Higher Education by age group Age of entrant

IoTs

All HEIs

% IoTs

19 or under

12,247

29,395

41.7%

20 to 22 23 to 24 25-29 Over 30

3,110 805 1,232 1,768

5,384 1,279 2,034 2,771

57.8% 62.9% 60.6% 63.8%

2.4 Diverse Entry Mechanisms: CAO Round A, Direct Entry and FETAC qualifications A further dimension of the admissions process that needs to be borne in mind in the Transition discussion is the diversity of application modes employed by the Institutes of Technology. Admission to first year of undergraduate programmes is through the CAO. Mechanisms such as the CAO Round A process enable the Institutes to review applications from eligible applicants at programme level, and offer places outside the standard competitive entry mechanism to mature, socio-economically disadvantaged and disabled students. Waterford Institute of Technology, for example, has a four stage assessment process for such applicants, which covers areas such as academic achievement, work experience, community and voluntary work and a skills audit, to score and rank applications. A number of Institutes use an interview process in assessing applicants. IT Tallaght, for example, interviews mature applicants and uses additional criteria, including inter alia knowledge of course(s) applied for, preparedness for third level, relevant experience/training and motivation to learn. Other institutes like IT Blanchardstown invite applicants to take part in an assessment on campus, which can help create a tangible link between the applicant and that particular institution. The overall effect of these processes is to broaden access within the context of the CAO application process; and, in the current academic year, the Institutes of Technology accounted for almost 63% of the total acceptances in the CAO Round A offers.

Considerable work has also been done across the sector to review and develop appropriate mechanisms to recognise prior learning and experience, and enable admission to programmes on a direct-entry basis. Sheridan and Linehan have provided a clear guide to the recognition of prior learning (RPL) process13 and most (if not all) institutes have clear RPL policies that are regularly updated. Such policies enable student admission to programmes other than those in the CAO, admission to stages other than stage 1 of a programme (for all programmes) and exemptions from modules of a programme. In addition, some Institutes run special preparatory courses to both broaden access and facilitate the transition to third level. Letterkenny IT, for example, has developed a direct entry system for second-chance learners who have successfully completed its Certificate in Preparatory Studies (Level 6). Over the past ten years, almost 1,000 learners have used this route for access onto full-time under-graduate programmes. Recently undertaken research in the institute has demonstrated that many of these students out-perform their peers who have come through the standard entry routes. In addition to the above mechanisms, the Institutes of Technology have also been at the forefront – through the Higher Education Links Scheme (HELS), and the establishment of a ‘points’ protocol for rating FETAC qualifications – in admitting applicants who hold further education qualifications. The proportion of CAO applicants with a FETAC qualification has been steadily increasing every year since 2001. Almost 20% of all CAO applicants now present with a FETAC qualification. There is, however, a marked variation in the number of students who receive and accept an offer, based on their FETAC qualification, from year to year. Furthermore, there is also a lack of statistical clarity on how many students are admitted solely on the basis of their FETAC qualifications, as many such applicants also present with Leaving Certificate results. Notwithstanding this, it is generally accepted that the majority of students presenting with FETAC qualifications are admitted to the institutes of technology.

13. I. Sheridan and M. Linehan, Recognition of Prior Learning: a Focus on Practice (CIT Press, Cork, 2009).

3. Key Transitions Issues: The Institute of Technology Perspective In the course of the Transitions debate a number of key issues have emerged, which have been the subject of extensive discussion amongst particular stakeholders or groups of stakeholders. All of the stakeholders concerned have been endeavouring to engage with these issues, both from the perspective of the students and from their own institutional perspective. The ultimate aim of this engagement has been to identify a set of realistic and sustainable actions, which can be agreed at a system level and which, when implemented, will genuinely improve the transition experience of all students entering third level for the first time. In this section, IOTI sets out its consideration of these issues and its proposals for action. The issues are grouped together under the following five thematic headings.

3.1 Broader Entry Routes 14. Hyland, Entry to Higher Education in Ireland in the 21st Century, pp. 3, 17, 22. 15. ‘From Transaction to Transition: Outcomes of the Conference on the Transition from Second to Third-Level Education in Ireland’, pp. 5, 18-9 16. Communication from the IUA Council to Minister for Education and Skills, Mr Ruairi Quinn TD on the matter of: Reform of Selection and Entry to University in the Context of National Education Policy (IUA, August 2012), p. 3, link available at http://www. transition.ie/updates.htm 17. ‘Submission by Institutes of Technology Ireland ... on Higher Education Admissions’, pp. 4-5, available at http:// www.transition.ie/files/ IOTIpoints180911.pdf

From the outset of the ‘Transition’ debate, the issue of providing broader entry routes into higher education for first year students has featured prominently in the discussion. In her paper published ahead of the Joint NCCA-HEA conference in September 2011, and drawing upon the 1999 Report of the Points Commission, Professor Hyland identified the existence of ‘too many denominated courses in First Year’ as an issue of concern for some stakeholders within and outside the education system, and suggested that the concern might be addressed by reconfiguring ‘first year courses to eliminate denominated courses and adopt a policy of generic first year courses unless there are compelling reasons not to do so’. 14 This suggestion was adopted by the HEA and NCCA as a recommendation emanating from the conference. It was proposed that ‘higher education institutions, individually and collectively, should review their undergraduate portfolio with a view to establishing broader entry to undergraduate programmes at level 8’ and that the ‘change needs to be made at system level’. 15 In August 2012, the IUA Council identified this issue as one of three specific ‘Transition’ recommendations which it wished to see progressed within the university sector, and established an Expert Taskforce to develop final proposals and a roadmap for implementation.16 In its initial submission to the Transitions conference, IOTI cautioned against the ‘seductive attractiveness’ of advancing with proposals – to be applied universally – to increase the generic nature of first year undergraduate programmes. In advance of the conference, there was concern that there would be a call to apply broader or generic entry to Level 6 and 7 programmes (2 and 3 year programmes) which, because of their shorter durations and strong orientation towards producing job ready graduates, do not readily lend themselves to such an approach.17

It is of note that the proposal that ultimately emerged out of the Transitions conference envisages the establishment of broader entry to undergraduate programmes at Level 8 only. While acknowledging that the proposed action exempts Level 6 and Level 7 programmes, IOTI views the proposal as challenging the existing and envisaged mission of the Technology sector within Irish higher education, and the sector’s ability to maintain genuine mission differentiation between itself and the rest of higher education. The Institutes of Technology offer more employment-focussed programmes than is the case in the traditional universities; and these programmes necessarily need a greater level of specificity. The denominated titles that are used arise, in the main, from the process of designing the programmes and are intended to meet industrial and enterprise requirements. In a recent speech on the future landscape of higher education (22 November 2012), the Minister for Education and Skills noted that ‘more than ever, we need a technological sector that is agile and responsive to ... the skills needs ... of a rapidly changing enterprise sector and an increasingly diverse workforce. A core objective will, therefore, be to protect and enhance the role of the IOT sector in supporting enterprise, underpinning diversity and promoting access and participation’. It is the view of IOTI that a blunt, universally-applied approach to the introduction of broader-entry routes into higher education would seriously undermine this core objective. At base, such a ‘one size fits all’ approach would be harmful both in terms of protecting and communicating the differentiation in mission that exists between the technological and traditional higher education institutions. On a more practical level, in a number of the institutes the Level 8 portfolio is inextricably linked to the Level 6 and Level 7 offerings so that the changes envisaged for Level 8 could not be implemented without the unintended consequence of tampering with the professional orientation of the latter suite of programmes. In 2012, the 14 Institutes provided 423 Level 6/Level 7 programmes and 330 at Level 8. IOTI would also caution that the faith being placed by some in the ameliorative effects of a return to a system of common entry that last existed in the 1980s may be unduly optimistic. It is the view of IOTI that the proposal fails to take account of the great increase in the number and range of students attending third-level institutions, and the great expansion of academic disciplines and sub-disciplines, that have taken place in the interim period. The denominated programmes available in the Technology sector are, in general, market-led, and appeal to the students and their parents and guidance counsellors, as well as to employers. It was indicated above (Section 2.2) the extent to which IoT programmes are rooted in the modern economy sectors, and service the skills needs of industry. Using denominated titles is one of the ways in which these programmes are uniquely identified and differentiated from more traditional programmes.

It is also the case, as evinced in the IUA’s communication to the Minister for Education and Skills, that the number of courses that are on offer through the CAO does not seem to be out of kilter with international norms.18 In any case, using the overall figure of courses presented in the CAO Handbook, or citing the growth in that number of courses over particular time-spans, is a rather crude indicator, unless it is analysed in conjunction with such issues as programme design and structure and common modular delivery and support. In terms of the academic and other support provided to students, a move to an exclusively generic mode of entry in the Technology sector would also be potentially damaging. Much of this support is organised and provided at the programme level, and the move to larger entry cohorts would militate against the institutions providing the level of support that is necessary for the typical student that enters an institute of technology within existing resources. A major, if the not main, reason advanced for moving to broader entry is that denominated programmes are generally adjudged to generate ‘heat’ in the ‘points race’. The logic, based on the supply-demand ratio, is that broader entry programmes usually have a higher number of places available and thus lower cut-off points; while denominated programmes usually have a smaller number of places available and higher cut-off points. All things being equal it is difficult to dispute this argument. But all things are not equal. Other factors, such as the reputation of institutions or the prestige of particular programmes, are also part of the mix, and the proliferation of denominated programmes in itself cannot be held responsible for heating up the ‘points race’, certainly not across all of higher education. This is clearly demonstrated, for example, in the HEA’s study on progression, published in 2010, which showed that the most common points attained by students entering Level 8 programmes in institutes of technology in 2007-8, was 300-350 points. In contrast, the most common points attained by students entering university programmes was 400-450 points.19 Although both sectors have substantial numbers of entry routes at Level 8 (in 2011 there were 330 across 14 institutes of technology, and 421 across 7 universities) they do not generate the same level of ‘heat’ with regard to the ‘points race’.

18. Ibid., p. 5. 19. http://www. hea.ie/files/files/ file/statistics/2010/ Retention%20&%20 Progression/HEA%20 Study%20of%20 Progression%20in%20 Irish%20Higher%20 Education%202010.pdf, at p. 16.

There is little doubt that the number of denominated programmes has grown exponentially in the past twenty years. However, the extent to which this growth in denominated programmes confuses students is much less clear, and has certainly not been investigated to any great extent, either amongst the students themselves or their teachers and guidance counsellors. It has not been the general experience of the institutes that many of their students make the wrong choice of course as a result of the large number of choices available to them when filling out their CAO forms. To obviate those instances where it does occur, however, a number of the institutes do offer parallel common entry routes in some disciplines; and in some institutions, including DIT, such courses are popular. The institutes recognise that the provision of these parallel, common-entry routes are useful for those students who are not ready to commit to particular denominated programmes at the point of entry and will look at introducing common entry in parallel to denominated entry in all institutions. In addition, they will also examine the extent to which there are programmes with an overly narrow

base of entry, particularly where there are complementary programmes which could be offered under one CAO code. In this connection, IOTI acknowledges that where such an unnecessary proliferation of programmes exists within its own or, indeed any sector of higher education, the State may need to mitigate this, and that the issue can be addressed in the context of the strategic dialogue process with the HEA. It is also the case that the implementation of structural reform in the Technology sector will have an impact on programme offerings, and that the sequencing of programme portfolio reform will need to proceed in tandem with, and not in advance of, institutional reconfiguration and the development of regional clusters.

3.2 Compulsory calculation of points for English and Maths; Bonus Points and Recoupling of Cognate Disciplines The Technology sector has regularly voiced its concern about the apparent fall in standards in numeracy and literacy among Irish second level students, as evinced by the results of the 2009 PISA study, and on the need to develop greater evidence-based research to support enhanced literacy and maths proficiency. A number of important initiatives are now under way to address this situation including the introduction of The National Strategy to Improve Literacy and Numeracy among Children and Young People 20 and the roll-out of Project Maths.21 In this connection, IOTI also notes that the Minister for Education and Skills has asked the NCCA to review the recommended time allocations for all subjects in primary school.22 IOTI would support reforms that recognise the need for students to spend more time on the acquisition of knowledge, skills and competence in the critical areas of literacy and numeracy and, indeed, science.

20. http://www. education.ie/en/ Publications/PolicyReports/lit_num_ strategy_full.pdf 21. http://www.ncca. ie/en/Curriculum_ and_Assessment/PostPrimary_Education/ Project_Maths/ 22. http://www. irishtimes.com/ newspaper/ education/2012/1218/ 1224327955687.html 23. Submission by Institutes of Technology Ireland ... on Higher Education Admissionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, p. 3, available at http:// www.transition.ie/files/ IOTIpoints180911.pdf

IOTI considers that the logic of these reforms, which place the acquisition of literacy and numeracy skills, including digital literacy, at the heart of second level learning, should be followed through into the selection processes for entry into third level education. In its initial submission to the Transitions conference, IOTI proposed that the option of including Leaving Certificate results in English and Mathematics in the calculation of points for entry into all higher education courses would be explored.23 IOTI still retains the view that such an exploration should proceed, and will support the research being undertaken by Professor Ă ine Hyland, arising out of the Transitions Conference, into the viability and potential benefits or consequences of including Mathematics and/or English in the calculation of points for all CAO courses (Levels 6, 7 and 8). In this connection, it is essential that the research and analysis will be undertaken in a manner that gives equal emphasis both to the Technology and university sectors. In theory, the Technology sector might be expected to attract learners with high levels of attainment in mathematics, given the technological nature of their programmes and the mathematical content. A study of 2007-8 entrants, however, shows that this is not necessarily the case. The data analysed at that time demonstrated that the numbers of new entrants into the Technological sector achieving 60 points or more (equivalent to a higher level C3 or Ordinary level A1 grade) were quite low.

Compared to national averages of 28% of entrants scoring 60 points or more, only 4% of IoT entrants at level 6, 7% at level 7 and 15% at level 8 scored at this level. The university sector admitted 43% of candidates at this level.24 In this context the need for greater research on the impact of making mathematics compulsory is clear, and the potential impact on the lower attainment levels in the Technology sector assessed so as to avoid either a migration of technology learners to universities, or a reduction of the available opportunities for learners to access higher education in the Technology sector. A related matter to the compulsory calculation of English and Maths points scores for the purposes of entry to higher education, is the issue of offering bonus points for particular subjects. From 2012, all higher education institutions (apart from NCAD) introduced a bonus scheme for Higher Level Leaving Certificate Mathematics, in which 25 points are added to an applicant’s points score if they achieve a D3 or upwards in the subject at higher level. In the context of the Transitions debate, there has been some discussion, particularly in the university sector, of extending this scheme to other subjects, either in relation to specific entry routes or for particular subjects which are deemed to be strategically important, or which are perceived to be more demanding in terms of the workload associated with them.25

24. A study of progression in Higher Education. A Report by the Higher Education Authority (HEA, 2010) p. 21, available at http:// www.hea.ie/files/files/ file/statistics/2010/ Retention%20&%20 Progression/HEA%20 Study%20of%20 Progression%20in%20 Irish%20Higher%20 Education%202010.pdf 25. Communication from the IUA Council to Minister for Education and Skills ... on the... Reform of Selection and Entry to University, p. 4. 26. ‘Submission by Institutes of Technology Ireland ... on Higher Education Admissions’, pp. 3-4, available at http://www.transition.ie/ files/IOTIpoints180911. pdf ; Communication from the IUA

IOTI takes the view that this issue needs to be explored with some caution. If such a scheme was expanded to any great degree, it might achieve some strategic reorientation in the way students choose their Leaving Certificate subjects, but depending on how extensive such an expansion of the bonus points scheme was, and the degree to which the strategic importance of particular subjects shifted over time, it might end up causing confusion to students and generating additional ‘heat’ in the points race, the very matters which Transitions reform is intended to ameliorate. In addition second level students might be forced into choosing third level places based on subject choices made at the start of the senior cycle, as a result of additional points being given in their subject mix. IOTI would advocate that the effects of the bonus points scheme for Higher Level Mathematics needs to be analysed thoroughly over the duration of the pilot before proceeding with any further expansion of the scheme, and that the discussion on the matter should be conducted at a national level amongst all relevant stakeholders. One final matter relating to the relationship of subject choice and competence at second level and performance at third level that should be considered further is the issue of students choosing combinations of subjects that are perceived to be easier in terms of accumulating points, at the expense of their relevance to the courses they ultimately undertake at third level. This is a matter of some concern to both the Institutes of Technology and the universities.26 In its initial submission to the Transition Conference, IOTI referred to the requirement in the International Baccalaureate for students to take subjects across six different groups – native language, additional language, experimental sciences, mathematics, arts and social sciences – as a potential model for organising subject choice in the Leaving Certificate, to prevent students from taking overlapping subject combinations like, for example, Agricultural Science, Biology and Home Economics (Social and Scientific). This proposal did not gain any traction at the time.

Another possibility would be to examine how higher education discipline choice might be linked in a more coherent fashion to appropriate subjects studied at Leaving Certificate, in order to achieve a better ‘handshake’ between second level exit and third level entry. As part of its contribution to Transitions reform, the Institutes of Technology will explore the feasibility of instituting a research project on this topic.

3.3 Foundation skills and the First-Year Experience One of the key recommendations that emerged out of the joint HEA-NCCA conference in 2011 was a call to: Reinforce the issue of foundational skills and the first-year experience as priorities for concerted action across Irish higher education institutions. IOTI fully supports the need to take concerted action on the issue of foundational skills and the first-year experience on a systematic basis. Within the Technology sector, there are a wide range of initiatives and research studies currently being undertaken on these very topics. The following illustrative examples provide a snapshot of some of this activity: • Galway-Mayo IT and Athlone IT Building on a SIF II funded project, a first year learning experience package has been deployed simultaneously in the two institutes across a range of disciplines since 2009. The package consists of two strands: a Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) programme; and a study skills development module titled ‘Learning to Learn’ (L2L). • Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology The Department of Entrepreneurship Dun Laoghaire IADT is undertaking a three year longitudinal study on first year student motivation in business, psychology and computer degree programmes. The research is examining such variables as gender, subject studied, course ranking and the influences of being a first generation student or living at or away from home. • IT Sligo In IT Sligo, research is being conducted on the question of whether different pre-college factors, such as prior educational attainment or father’s socio-economic background, require different types of student retention interventions. If this is the case, it will be possible to apply these different types of interventions to groups of students, thus reducing the costs and increasing the effectiveness of the intervention. In addition, a number of mentoring programmes have been put in place for first year students, which cover themes such as ‘settling in’, academic support and exam preparation. Council to Minister for Education and Skills ... on the... Reform of Selection and Entry to University, p. 4.

• Waterford IT Waterford IT has put in place a number of innovative Teaching and Learning methodologies associated with two access programmes – the Genzyme Buddy programme and the Access-linked module ‘Science in Society’ (a first year elective module). WIT’s Direct Entry Pathways (Reach) has also developed a series of sophisticated recruitment, selection and mentoring processes, which enhance the first year experience, and which are grounded upon quantitative data analysis and qualitative feedback from the students and other stakeholders. • IT Carlow The Teaching and Learning centre in IT Carlow has instituted a number of initiatives to enhance the experience of first year students, including inter alia a Supplementary Teaching Scheme, which provides additional teaching hours in certain subjects to students who are experiencing difficulties; and a Computer Aided Learning package, entitled ‘Understanding Mathematics’, which features in the delivery of all save one first year mathematics modules, and which is designed to overcome fears about their maths’ competences amongst first year students. • IT Tallaght The Centre for Learning and Teaching in IT Tallaght supports various initiatives to enhance the experience of all undergraduate students, with a specific focus on first year. It provides ‘Introduction to ICT’ workshops each September, and a drop-in support service for learning technologies, mathematics, Academic English, and training and support in the use of assistive technologies. Furthermore, commencing in 2012, all first year full time students will complete a ‘Learning to Learn at Third Level’ module in semester 1 of their programme. IT Tallaght is also involved in an innovative and collaborative partnership with County Dublin VEC and the Dodder Valley Partnership, which delivers a 10 ECTS credit special purpose award at Level 6 in the NFQ entitled ‘Preparation for Studying at Third Level’, and which is offered free of charge. • IT Blanchardstown Building on the success of recent initiatives, such as offering learning styles screening and providing support for all first year students through the associated National Learning Network office, a special working group has been established in IT Blanchardstown to investigate the first year experience. It has identified and implemented a number of initiatives targeted at improving the experience of the institute’s diverse learner population, including a restructured first year to accommodate a study-skills package; as well as a of range of specific departmental initiatives including mentoring students both peer-to-peer and academic, the development of videos for the institute’s website, a student monitoring process, a worry box and specific clinics/workshops.

• IT Tralee Initiatives undertaken in IT Tralee include a ‘Learning at Third Level’ module, which is delivered across all programmes in Semester 1, and focuses on developing the student as a third level learner as well as embedding the student in their programme of studies. Head Start Maths and Head Start English are programmes run for pre-students in advance of the commencement of the first year to better prepare them for the Maths and Communication requirement of higher education. In addition, the Learner Support Unit (LSU) runs a suite of Workshops on Foundation Skills in the areas that students find most problematic. • Letterkenny IT Following numerous programmatic reviews of the Certificate in Preparatory Studies and the Certificate in Access Studies (Level 6, 60 and 30 credit respectively) programmes, it emerged that many of the foundational skills that mature students needed on returning to education would also be of benefit to ‘standard’ first year entrants. With assistance from the NCCA, Letterkenny IT re-wrote its ‘Communications’ and ‘Study skills’ modules and standardised these for all first year students across the Institute. Furthermore, this development has been supported by CPD from experts such as Sally Brown, and a large repository of resources has been developed to assist staff with delivery. In parallel, LYIT has also re-written its maths modules for first years and has also e-enabled a large number of video tutorials which are now available on YouTube. All foundational level maths modules have also been e-enabled are and are free for staff and students to access at any time. Apart from these specific institutional initiatives, a number of the institutes are also involved in regional collaborative projects that are directly related to enhancing the first year experience. The Shannon Consortium, comprising Limerick IT, IT Tralee, the University of Limerick and Mary Immaculate College, has undertaken an analysis of the learning styles of students on entry, the outcomes of which are being used to assist them in their learning approaches. In addition, the findings have also been provided to lecturers. In a similar fashion, and as part of the Dublin Regional Higher Educational Alliance Teaching Fellowship research on the First Year Experience, the fellows’ undertook a project which will result in three separate outcomes; a strategic literature review; an audit of practice across the 8 DRHEA institutions (IADT, DIT, ITT, ITB, DCU, UCD, NUIM and TCD) including case studies of specific initiatives; and a ‘Toolkit’ comprising an online repository of information and video interviews from the fellows, international colleagues and the case study initiators. Information on this work is available at http://www.drhea.ie.

IOTI is cognisant of the need to leverage this kind of work on a system-level basis and will work to establish a dedicated forum for the enhancement of the first year experience in the Technology sector, which will focus on the unique characteristics of entrants to the sector. This activity will link in with the work of the National Forum for Teaching and Learning, and will have specific responsibility for the connection between access, opportunity and retention. One area that will be explored is the feasibility of creating a foundational year for entrants who are not decided on their future career path. The additional year would expose learners to discipline specific learning and guide effective career planning and study skills based on the individual’s competencies and interests rather than points. If pursued, each institution would have one such programme with the entrant applying to the Institute rather than a programme. This would add an additional year of tuition but might produce a better fit between the learner and the final programme, and thus enhance retention. It is also of note that, ahead of the Transition conference in September 2011, IOTI advanced the proposal to lengthen the academic year, with a view to enhancing the first year student experience. IOTI remains committed to the achievement of this objective. That said, it does not underestimate the challenges associated with the implementation of the proposal, especially in the HR/IR domain; and recognises that there is a need for engagement amongst all relevant stakeholders to ensure that it is realised. In conclusion, IOTI also acknowledges and welcomes the establishment of the National Forum for Teaching and Learning, and recognises the latter’s potential to facilitate and lead collective action in the areas of developing foundational skills and enhancing the first year experience. The sector is committed to working with the Forum, and its inaugural chairperson, Professor Sarah Moore, in maximising the impact of the many initiatives that are currently being pursued in these areas through the individual institutes or under the auspices of the sector’s Learning Innovation Network (LIN), a network of all 13 Institute of Technology and DIT. The Technology sector has been at the forefront of academic staff development for teaching and learning through LIN, which is a collaborative project that has been successfully sharing resources and expertise since 2007. Lecturers are the front line higher education staff that students have access to, and this staff-student interaction shapes much of the first year experience. LIN endeavours to equip lecturers to deal with an ever increasing diversity of learner needs through academic professional development. APD programmes for staff now run in all institutions in the Technology sector – a key support for the first year experience.

3.4 Access and the broader Transition experience As set out in its original submission, IOTI is of the view that Transitions reform cannot be a self-contained activity and must necessarily be explored in the context of the lifelong learning and up-skilling opportunities that higher education institutions provide to an increasingly diverse set of learners. This diversity is particularly marked in the Technology sector. In the academic year 2011-12, for example, 20.4% of the 80,216 students enrolled in the Institutes of Technology studied on a part-time or distance learning basis. In addition, of the 4,251 enrolments on to Springboard labour activation programmes in 2010-11, 42% or 1,766 were in the Institute of Technology sector, as against figures of 14% in the University sector, 0% in other HEA funded colleges and 44% in other private, non-HEA funded institutions. To these figures can be added the enrolments on Level 6 and Level 7 programmes, which also play a key role in opening up access to higher education to a more diverse body of learners. In 2011-12, over 45% of the 63,873 full-time students in the sector were enrolled on Level 6 or Level 7 programmes. On foot of the Transitions conference, the HEA and NCCA recommended that: The broader issues of access to higher education beyond the quota of full-time places for school-leavers and the issue of entry to part-time programmes will be explored as part of the implementation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030. IOTI believes that the system needs to go further than this and would advocate that a more integrated approach is adopted in relation to the transition and access discussions. In reality, particularly in the context of the severe budgetary constraints under which the higher education system now operates, it is not possible to make decisions pertaining solely to the second-level student cohort entering Level 8 programmes, that are divorced from decisions relating to other types of student and programme provision. The policy commitments to enhance Lifelong Learning and the up-skilling and re-skilling of the Irish workforce, if they are to be fully realised, will require such an approach. For those institutions that grapple on a daily basis with the practicalities of providing for such a diverse student body, such an integrated approach is not merely desirable but an unavoidable reality.

3.5 Information A critical area for enhancing the transition experience not just of the traditional second level student cohort, but all potential learners, relates to the quality of information that higher education providers publish about their programmes. This was acknowledged in the Transition conference, and led to a recommendation on the part of the HEA and NCCA that: Higher education institutions should take steps to improve the quality of information on the subject content and learning outcomes of their courses, particularly in the context of broader intake to undergraduate programmes. IOTI is of the view that the provision by HEIs of high quality and accessible information on their programmes to second level students would go a long way towards supporting students in making informed course choices in the CAO application process. One proposal that might help in this regard at a system level would be to progress the National Strategy recommendation [R7] on the development of subject guidelines (as supporting infrastructure to the National Framework of Qualifications) across higher education.27 If such guidelines were developed, and mapped to second level curricula, the issue of how second level students perceive and understand third level programmes â&#x20AC;&#x201C; whether in their generic or denominated forms â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and how they relate, or do not relate, to the subjects they study in school could be addressed in a more sophisticated manner than is currently envisaged. Indeed, such guidelines could make provision for explaining and contextualising denominated programmes within broader discipline areas. For such guidelines to be effective, they would need to be developed on a cross binary basis by academic subject experts, and on the basis that they would not just be established to support the NFQ and the use of learning outcomes, but that they would also have a communication function and provide a basis for engagement between the second and third level systems, using the NFQ as a common reference point.

27. http://www.hea.ie/ files/files/DES_Higher_ Ed_Main_Report.pdf, pp. 18, 58

4. Conclusion and summary of actions to be undertaken by the Institutes of Technology IOTI believes that it is a necessary and valuable undertaking to explore the issue of the transition of learners into third-level education on a system-wide basis. However, IOTI is also of the view that the exploration should take place on a broader canvas than has been the case hitherto, and that, as well as considering issues surrounding the transition of second-level students – especially, the negative effect of the ‘points race’ on a relatively small cohort of high achieving students – it should also have regard to the transition issues pertaining to access and the increasing diversity of learners in the system. In this regard, IOTI would advocate that any changes that are being pursued at a system level should be consistent with, and enhance the successful record of the Technology sector in opening up access and opportunity. IOTI also acknowledges that the Institutes, no less than other higher education institutions, must fulfil their responsibility for engaging learners in their transition to higher education, particularly through the design and delivery of their programmes. This may require radical changes to the structure of the academic year, the provision of support services and the type and mode of module delivery – reforms that IOTI believes can only be pursued in conjunction, and in sequence with the institutional reconfigurations currently underway as part of the implementation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030. The following are the main action points that the Institutes of Technology will pursue with regard to Transitions reform: On broader entry • The Institutes of Technology will look at introducing common entry in parallel to denominated entry in all institutions. • The Institutes of Technology will examine the extent to which there are programmes with an overly narrow base of entry, particularly where there are complementary programmes which could be offered under one CAO code. • The Institutes of Technology acknowledge that the State needs to mitigate unnecessary proliferation of programmes and that this issue can be addressed in the context of the strategic dialogue process with the HEA.

On the compulsory calculation of points for English and Maths, bonus points and the re-coupling of cognate disciplines • The Institutes of Technology, through IOTI, will support the research being undertaken by Professor Áine Hyland, arising out of the Transitions Conference, into the viability and potential benefits or consequences of including Mathematics and/or English in the calculation of points for all CAO courses (levels 6, 7 and 8). • The Institutes of Technology, through IOTI, will explore the feasibility of instituting a research project aimed at linking higher education discipline choice to appropriate subjects studied at Leaving Certificate, in order to achieve a better ‘handshake’ between second level exit and third level entry. On the First Year Experience and Foundation Skills • The Institutes of Technology, through IOTI and LIN, will work to establish a dedicated forum for the enhancement of the first year experience in the Technology sector, which will focus on the unique characteristics of entrants to the sector. This activity will link in with the work of the National Forum for Teaching and Learning, and will have specific responsibility for the connection between access, opportunity and retention, including the development of foundational and transversal skills. • The Institutes of Technology will also work with the National Forum for Teaching and Learning, and its inaugural chairperson, Professor Sarah Moore, to maximise the impact of the many sectoral initiatives in these areas, whether they emanate from the individual institutes or under the auspices of the sector’s Learning Innovation Network (LIN). • The Institutes of Technology remain committed to the objective of lengthening the academic year for the purpose, in particular, of enhancing the first year experience. There are a number of challenges associated with the implementation of this proposal, especially in the HR/IR domain. The Institutes of Technology, through IOTI, will engage with all relevant stakeholders to advance the proposal. On Access and the Transition experience • The Institutes of Technology, through IOTI, will advocate at a national level for a more integrated approach to addressing the related access, student diversity and transition issues. On Information • IOTI proposes that the recommendation in the National Strategy [R7] on the development of subject guidelines (as supporting infrastructure to the National Framework of Qualifications) across higher education be progressed, and that such guidelines be mapped to second level curricula. The aim would be not only to explain the content and learning outcomes of third-level programmes, but how denominated programmes relate to broader subject areas, and how both of these relate or do not relate to second level subjects.

5. Appendix: Transitions Recommendations Table 1: Proposals requiring action by HEIs

Proposed Action

Status

Conduct research into the viability, and potential benefits and consequences, of including Mathematics and/or English in the calculation of points for all courses

Research paper to be prepared in 2012

Reinforce the issue of foundational skills and the first-year experience as priorities for concerted action across Irish higher education institutions. The National Academy for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching has potential to facilitate and lead collective action on these issues.

The National Academy will be established in Q2 2012 following consultation with the higher education academic community

The academic year should be extended in all undergraduate education programmes to accommodate the incorporation of transversal skills without compromising discipline-specific content and academic rigour.

As this action does not require any changes to existing contracts, implementation should commence for first-year programmes without delay.

The higher education institutions, individually and collectively, should review their undergraduate portfolio with a view to establishing broader entry to undergraduate programmes at level 8. This change needs to be made at system level.

Commencement as soon as possible subject to discussions between HEA , QQAI and higher education institutions

Higher education institutions should take steps to improve the quality of information on the subject content and learning outcomes of their courses, particularly in the context of broader intake to undergraduate programmes.

Immediate commencement by higher education institutions

Conduct research into the viability and potential benefits and consequences of introducing graduate-only entry to professional courses, including health-care courses.

Research paper to be prepared in 2012

The broader issues of access to higher education beyond the quota of full-time places for school-leavers and the issue of entry to part-time programmes will be explored as part of the implementation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030

Initial scoping to be completed by summer 2012

Continue closer co-operation between the HEA and the NCCA with a focus in the short-term on STEM and assessment/ evaluation in second-level and higher education.

Initiated

Table 2: Proposals requiring action by the Schools sector Proposed Action

Status

Complete new curriculum specifications for the three science subjects: Biology, Chemistry, Physics incorporating new methods of assessing scientific knowledge and skills

Underway

Continue with the review of other senior-cycle subjects, commencing with English and modern languages, in order to ensure that assessment approaches are closely aligned to curriculum objectives and learning outcomes

Initiated

The new optional subject Politics and Society is already complete and awaiting implementation. Economics and Art have both been revised and the assessment of both will require the use of problem-solving and critical and analytical skills as well as the use of technology. New science courses, and a new course in Physical Education, are nearing completion as optional subjects that will develop a wide range of skills including team-building, critical analysis, debating, coaching, goalsetting and achievement, performance analysis and development, and digital analysis. As it stands, the resources are not available to support the roll-out of these subjects.

Pending

Explore ways of increasing learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; access to a broad range of subjects in the senior cycle. The possibility for inter-school collaboration and e-learning opportunities should be explored and shared by the NCCA.

Initial scoping as part of the planning period for junior cycle 2012â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2014

Nurture and assess a broader range of generic competencies as part of senior-cycle curriculum and assessment

Initiated

Introduce a broad range of assessment approaches, including schoolbased assessment in the junior cycle, and develop teacher and system capacity

Initiated

The NCCA and the State Examination Commission (SEC) will develop proposals to address any problematic predictability identified in an analysis of predictability in the Leaving Certificate examinations.

Analysis and proposals complete by end 2012.

Move to replace the current grading system of 14 points with an 8-point system (A1, A2, B, C, D, E NG).

Exploration to be undertaken by the NCCA and SEC, with the involvement of experts in examination grading. Any date for this change can be set when the change to undergraduate entry is in place.