Mr. Gary Ó Donnchadha:

I have a few remarks and I will provide the secretariat with a copy of my remarks after the meeting. A key innovation in the junior cycle reform process was the provision for junior cycle examinations to be marked by State Examinations Commission and for new classroom-based assessments to be conducted by classroom teachers. We consider that this dual approach will deliver the very best context to ensure a learner experience appropriate to the needs of the 21st century. Teachers will support student learning through conducting and grading classroom-based assessments. This is a major element in the assessment arrangements for the junior cycle. This kind of classroom assessment complements the end of cycle examination. It is very real and immediate for the learner because the teacher scaffolds and gives constructive feedback through the journey that is the three years of junior cycle. Importantly, the focus on the final examination is significantly reduced, which was a key objective of the reforms. The dual assessment approach is being developed to align better with the learning goals of a modern curriculum programme. The new junior cycle profile of achievement is the record that the learner will receive at the end of the junior cycle. The record will give students, parents and guardians a much broader picture of the young person's learning experiences and achievements throughout the junior cycle. Parents and students asked for a rich picture of engagement, involvement and celebration of the learning.

We recognise that embedding formative classroom assessment represents a significant culture change for teachers, for students and for parents. Thus, the junior cycle for teacher support teams will be engaging with schools during the next five years of implementation.

The rebalancing of assessment modes to introduce classroom-based assessments and complement final summative examinations changes the conversation fundamentally. The call to directly supervise external commercial providers is misplaced in a context where our junior cycle strategy and focus are moving away from reliance on a single external examination and promoting a wider range of learning opportunities for all. What we can do is to positively draw the attention of teachers to a wide range of materials on the NCCA, SEC and junior cycle for teachers support service websites that will assist in developing appropriate, valid and reliable assessment instruments and approaches. We can commit to providing this additional advice, and links to materials, on our websites in response to the very matters raised through this committee.

Part of this issue relates to the strong commitment of Government and the Department to reduce the reliance on the junior cycle summative examination. This is reflected in the framework, which reduced the time to two hours but balanced it with the time allocated to ongoing classroom-based assessment modes throughout the three years of the junior cycle. Adding time to an examination would be, in our view, the wrong thing to do, bearing in mind the many new ways teachers and schools have of capturing and celebrating the learning in junior cycle. It may be that the provider of the mock examination can already see that the test design was, on balance, demanding too much of students on this occasion. The solution may be for providers to ensure that the right kind of concepts and skills are assessed and rewarded while checking, through standard quality control procedures, that the assessment can be completed within a reasonable time. I have already said what we propose to do, which is to provide a mix of materials on our websites. Our commitment to package the currently available resources in one place should be a significant help to all, especially the learners.