Examwatch 2024: Student Response to Major Leaving Cert and Junior Cycle Assessments
The higher level political and social science exams required pupils to utilise critical thinking strategies amidst coursework that focussed on recent issues. According to Paul McAndrew, an educator at the Institute of Education who specialises in politics and society, the exam offered a wide array of questions to select from.
McAndrew opined that the exam mirrored current political discourse, albeit in a potentially excessively abstract way for a majority of the scholars. The test incorporated numerous difficult sections that compelled students to alter their understanding to novel situations or think beyond the specific details of the curriculum.
The paper underscored the thought that being knowledgeable about societal occurrences can be more beneficial for success in the subject as compared to a rigid educational approach. The examination embodied a prevalent notion that the papers were replicating the year’s news headlines. Although current, this requires certain aspects of the queries to mirror more of casual family discussion than actual coursework. As per McAndrew, this could create a discernible gap between the top performers and efficient learners.
Section A of the test had brief queries wherein students were instructed to answer 10 out of the provided 15. McAndrew observed that this flexibility would have been essential as some questions touched on content not clearly present in the curriculum.
An example of a question not directly linked to syllabus content asked for an explanation of the significance of a political party’s manifesto. Pupils were expected to repurpose content on political party roles, an unprecedented requirement that went beyond usual expectations.
In the same section, students were asked to expound on the connection between western imperialism and Edward Said’s concept of orientalism; a vast topic for which only four lines were granted. Answering such a broad question succinctly necessitated an impressive degree of conciseness and clarity.
Section B, featuring data-based questions (DBQ), differed from previous years as both texts were sourced from lobbying groups, deviating from the standard objective CSO data. Both pieces contained a great deal of unbiased data which required scholars to apply critical thinking strategies to separate the information from its contextual interpretation.
Mr McAndrew expressed that the discursive essays in section C were a blend of the appealing and the demanding. According to him, every topic commenced with enticing aspects to draw students, only to add a unique spin that would throw off those attempting to digress or rant. Take for instance, the theme of ‘nationalism and/or cultural identity’ would appear routine for many. However, this was scrutinised specifically through the theoretical perspective of Thomas Hylan Eriksen, thereby limiting possible discussion points and veering towards control measures in ‘overheating’ societies. Other topics posed questions on the familiar subject of social media, but situated within the framework of ‘times of social and political instability’, an area not typically covered. According to him, the topic on the UN would demand learners to link various topics, since the UN isn’t a standalone subject.