The chief examiner’s report in respect of Leaving Cert agricultural science was published last week and it contains analysis on how the class of 2015 fared in the subject. It also contains recommendations for those taking the subject in the future on how to maximise their performance – based on pitfalls made by other students over the years. We summarise some of the main points of the report.
Facts and figures
The amount of students taking ag science as a Leaving Cert subject has increased in recent years, from 12.7% of the total student cohort in 2011 to 13.9% in 2015. For every year between 2011 and 2015, a higher percentage of girls took the higher-level paper than the ordinary-level paper. For example, in 2015, 26% of those sitting the ordinary-level paper were female while in the same year, 41.2% of those taking the higher-level paper were girls. In fact, in every year between 2011 and 2015, the percentage of those taking the higher-level paper that are girls hovers around the 40% mark, while the corresponding figure for the ordinary-level paper has been between 24% and 30%.
Over the five years reported upon, female candidates consistently outperformed their male counterparts at all points in the grade distribution.
Failure rates
Just under 20% of students failed the ordinary-level ag science paper between 2011 and 2015, while approximately 8% of higher-level pupils failed their paper in the same period.
Coursework
The practical coursework component is allocated 100 marks and is therefore worth 25% of the paper and the chief examiner has a lot to say about it.
Coursework is marked by the candidate’s own teacher, subject to moderation by external examiners appointed by the SEC. Firstly, both levels score significantly better in the coursework than they do in the written component.
The range of acceptable topics for the coursework is wide, but some topics (such as dairying, beef, sucklers and calf-rearing, and barley, potatoes and grass) are more commonly presented than others. Projects on sheep, pigs, wheat and oats were submitted less often, while some less common project topics included oilseed rape, forage rape, maize, mushrooms, strawberries, bee-keeping and buffalo-rearing.
However, one concern the chief examiner had was that year in, year out, there are projects being presented by students on topics that are not acceptable for this part of the examination. This year, for example, some projects were presented on farm machinery, REPS and farm safety, but unfortunately projects on these topics do not gain any marks.
Other flaws commonly found in this element of examination include poorly executed farm plans, laboratory notebooks that lack results, conclusions, discussion or dates. It is also thought that practical work is not being done for the scientific investigations on genetics, ecology, microbiology and animal physiology. Furthermore, many candidates continue to cover only one crop instead of the required two.
In the report, the chief examiner imparts some specific advice to enhance projects:
The use of photographs taken by candidates themselves. Photographs which show candidates working on their own practical experience projects.Keeping an annual farming diary. The inclusion of relevant items such as mart receipts, factory grades, feed labels and fertiliser samples.Comprehensive farm layout plans.It is also noted in the report that there is widespread use of material downloaded from internet sources and candidates do not seem to know their own projects very well when they are interviewed.
General analysis
“Poor examination technique and general ill-preparedness” is how the chief examiner described what was seen in many cases in the ordinary-level category in 2015.
Across the ordinary-level paper, questions that required demonstration of candidates’ understanding of the scientific reasoning behind particular processes or the details of laboratory practical activities were poorly answered as were questions that commanded any significant depth of understanding of particular concepts or practices.
Answers on the ordinary-level paper were also weak in the understanding of diseases affecting farm animals or crops and the reasons for the agricultural importance of particular invertebrates.
Questions that sought candidates’ knowledge of farming practices at procedural level were reasonably well answered.
At both levels, there was evidence of significant weakness in the ability of candidates to explain and/or understand specialised terminology in the course of responding to questions, while higher-level candidates’ answers were weak in describing the procedures of outdoor/field experiments and in describing the life cycle of the potato blight fungus.
Higher-level candidates performed very well in animal production topics – particularly calf-rearing, as well as in sheep, dairy, beef and in describing laboratory experimental procedures.
There was evidence at both levels of a poor ability by some candidates to read questions thoroughly and lay out their answers to their best advantage. For example, there were cases where candidates did not give the required number of answers when a particular number was sought or, often, candidates offered answers that were entirely irrelevant to the question asked. Also, at both levels, explaining or understanding specialised terminology in the course of responding to questions was very poor.
The chief examiner uses the term “aversion to soil” to describe students’ attitudes to the soil topic at both levels. Some 38% of students attempted the main soil question (question two) on the higher-level paper, making it the second-least attempted question and it turned out to be the lowest-scoring at an average of 14.9 marks out of 48 (31%). At ordinary level, question 10 was also the second-least attempted, with half of students attempting it and also the lowest scoring at an average of 24.3 marks out of 60 (41%).
The chief examiner further advises students to practise drawing large, tidy accurate diagrams and labelling the parts of those diagrams clearly, to learn the reasons behind all steps in practical activities and the significance of a control in scientific experiments, understand the difference between the result and the conclusion and use these concepts accurately in examination answers.
Best and Worst Answered Questions
Best answered in section one of the ordinary-level paper: ecology.Worst answered in section one of the ordinary-level paper: organisms of agricultural importance.Best answered in section two of the ordinary-level paper: genetics.Worst answered in section two of the ordinary-level paper: farm animal digestive systems.Best answered overall question on a higher-level paper: the laboratory or field practical activities (any two from four questions).Worst answered overall question on a higher-level paper: soil.There is also advice for teachers in the report. It is advised that they should give their pupils the opportunity to carry out appropriate practical activities in the field and laboratory and ensure that students understand the reasons behind the various steps in each activity.
Teachers should help their students to practise the careful reading of questions, so that they can prioritise the information or analysis sought in their answers. Teachers should also stress the importance of giving accurate specific figures or narrow ranges, where appropriate, for birth-weights, liveweight gain, yields, age at slaughter and similar criteria.
Teachers should advise students not to give minimalist answers to questions on complex topics when answering questions that ask for “scientific explanations”, particularly at higher level.
This is by no means a comprehensive analysis of the chief examiner’s report.
See www.examinations.ie
The chief examiner’s report in respect of Leaving Cert agricultural science was published last week and it contains analysis on how the class of 2015 fared in the subject. It also contains recommendations for those taking the subject in the future on how to maximise their performance – based on pitfalls made by other students over the years. We summarise some of the main points of the report.
Facts and figures
The amount of students taking ag science as a Leaving Cert subject has increased in recent years, from 12.7% of the total student cohort in 2011 to 13.9% in 2015. For every year between 2011 and 2015, a higher percentage of girls took the higher-level paper than the ordinary-level paper. For example, in 2015, 26% of those sitting the ordinary-level paper were female while in the same year, 41.2% of those taking the higher-level paper were girls. In fact, in every year between 2011 and 2015, the percentage of those taking the higher-level paper that are girls hovers around the 40% mark, while the corresponding figure for the ordinary-level paper has been between 24% and 30%.
Over the five years reported upon, female candidates consistently outperformed their male counterparts at all points in the grade distribution.
Failure rates
Just under 20% of students failed the ordinary-level ag science paper between 2011 and 2015, while approximately 8% of higher-level pupils failed their paper in the same period.
Coursework
The practical coursework component is allocated 100 marks and is therefore worth 25% of the paper and the chief examiner has a lot to say about it.
Coursework is marked by the candidate’s own teacher, subject to moderation by external examiners appointed by the SEC. Firstly, both levels score significantly better in the coursework than they do in the written component.
The range of acceptable topics for the coursework is wide, but some topics (such as dairying, beef, sucklers and calf-rearing, and barley, potatoes and grass) are more commonly presented than others. Projects on sheep, pigs, wheat and oats were submitted less often, while some less common project topics included oilseed rape, forage rape, maize, mushrooms, strawberries, bee-keeping and buffalo-rearing.
However, one concern the chief examiner had was that year in, year out, there are projects being presented by students on topics that are not acceptable for this part of the examination. This year, for example, some projects were presented on farm machinery, REPS and farm safety, but unfortunately projects on these topics do not gain any marks.
Other flaws commonly found in this element of examination include poorly executed farm plans, laboratory notebooks that lack results, conclusions, discussion or dates. It is also thought that practical work is not being done for the scientific investigations on genetics, ecology, microbiology and animal physiology. Furthermore, many candidates continue to cover only one crop instead of the required two.
In the report, the chief examiner imparts some specific advice to enhance projects:
The use of photographs taken by candidates themselves. Photographs which show candidates working on their own practical experience projects.Keeping an annual farming diary. The inclusion of relevant items such as mart receipts, factory grades, feed labels and fertiliser samples.Comprehensive farm layout plans.It is also noted in the report that there is widespread use of material downloaded from internet sources and candidates do not seem to know their own projects very well when they are interviewed.
General analysis
“Poor examination technique and general ill-preparedness” is how the chief examiner described what was seen in many cases in the ordinary-level category in 2015.
Across the ordinary-level paper, questions that required demonstration of candidates’ understanding of the scientific reasoning behind particular processes or the details of laboratory practical activities were poorly answered as were questions that commanded any significant depth of understanding of particular concepts or practices.
Answers on the ordinary-level paper were also weak in the understanding of diseases affecting farm animals or crops and the reasons for the agricultural importance of particular invertebrates.
Questions that sought candidates’ knowledge of farming practices at procedural level were reasonably well answered.
At both levels, there was evidence of significant weakness in the ability of candidates to explain and/or understand specialised terminology in the course of responding to questions, while higher-level candidates’ answers were weak in describing the procedures of outdoor/field experiments and in describing the life cycle of the potato blight fungus.
Higher-level candidates performed very well in animal production topics – particularly calf-rearing, as well as in sheep, dairy, beef and in describing laboratory experimental procedures.
There was evidence at both levels of a poor ability by some candidates to read questions thoroughly and lay out their answers to their best advantage. For example, there were cases where candidates did not give the required number of answers when a particular number was sought or, often, candidates offered answers that were entirely irrelevant to the question asked. Also, at both levels, explaining or understanding specialised terminology in the course of responding to questions was very poor.
The chief examiner uses the term “aversion to soil” to describe students’ attitudes to the soil topic at both levels. Some 38% of students attempted the main soil question (question two) on the higher-level paper, making it the second-least attempted question and it turned out to be the lowest-scoring at an average of 14.9 marks out of 48 (31%). At ordinary level, question 10 was also the second-least attempted, with half of students attempting it and also the lowest scoring at an average of 24.3 marks out of 60 (41%).
The chief examiner further advises students to practise drawing large, tidy accurate diagrams and labelling the parts of those diagrams clearly, to learn the reasons behind all steps in practical activities and the significance of a control in scientific experiments, understand the difference between the result and the conclusion and use these concepts accurately in examination answers.
Best and Worst Answered Questions
Best answered in section one of the ordinary-level paper: ecology.Worst answered in section one of the ordinary-level paper: organisms of agricultural importance.Best answered in section two of the ordinary-level paper: genetics.Worst answered in section two of the ordinary-level paper: farm animal digestive systems.Best answered overall question on a higher-level paper: the laboratory or field practical activities (any two from four questions).Worst answered overall question on a higher-level paper: soil.There is also advice for teachers in the report. It is advised that they should give their pupils the opportunity to carry out appropriate practical activities in the field and laboratory and ensure that students understand the reasons behind the various steps in each activity.
Teachers should help their students to practise the careful reading of questions, so that they can prioritise the information or analysis sought in their answers. Teachers should also stress the importance of giving accurate specific figures or narrow ranges, where appropriate, for birth-weights, liveweight gain, yields, age at slaughter and similar criteria.
Teachers should advise students not to give minimalist answers to questions on complex topics when answering questions that ask for “scientific explanations”, particularly at higher level.
This is by no means a comprehensive analysis of the chief examiner’s report.
See www.examinations.ie
SHARING OPTIONS