The future of education: Exploring curriculum reform in the Junior Cycle
A UL research team is looking at the impact of ‘far reaching and ambitious’ changes to the Junior Cycle curriculum. Sarah Blake speaks to Professor Oliver McGarr to find out what has been learned so far about ‘what was one of the largest and most extensive curriculum changes in the history of the State'
Professor Oliver McGarr Pictures: Sean Curtin/True Media
A research team at University of Limerick is exploring the implementation, enactment and impact of the Framework for Junior Cycle (FJC) in post-primary schools.
After a tender process in 2020, the study was commissioned by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) to report on the views of teachers, principals, students, parents, and wider educational stakeholders on the Framework.
The UL project team is led by Professor Oliver McGarr with two project co-directors, Dr Orla McCormack and Dr John O’Reilly, along with a team of 11 researchers from the School of Education and the Department of Physical Education and Sports Science at the Faculty of Education and Health Sciences.
The team has a mix of experts in different subject areas and research methodologies and also draws from a wider group of both national and international advisors to guide the work. As a longitudinal study, the experiences of the schools are being recorded over a four-year period in order to capture the complexity, challenges and successes of the curriculum changes.
“The research design is very comprehensive and involves many different aspects. Interviews were conducted with a range of stakeholders in key agencies across Ireland. We recruited a representative sample of 100 post-primary schools in the country and have invited all teachers in these schools to complete a detailed online questionnaire at two different time points. We have also invited the school principals from these schools to participate in an interview to give their views on the school’s enactment of the changes. In-depth case studies in 12 of these schools, including a YouthReach and Special School, is also taking place at two time points as we felt it was important to capture the voices of all learners,” Professor McGarr explained.
“The UL team don’t see our roles as evaluating teachers or schools and instead we want to tell teachers and schools’ stories of their experiences of the changes. We see ourselves working with schools rather than evaluating them. This approach and philosophy underpinning our research has helped to develop strong relationships with the schools and has helped maintain good engagement throughout the project.”
The changes date back to 2012 when then Minister for Education and Skills, Ruairí Quinn, announced a major reform of the Junior Certificate curriculum. With new approaches to assessment being proposed, it was the most radical shake-up of the junior cycle programme since the ending of the Intermediate Certificate and Group Certificate examinations in 1991.
Professor McGarr outlined how many factors contributed to the reforms:
“For many decades the Junior Certificate was criticised as being too focused on academic content and that it didn’t equip students with important life skills. Research in the mid-2000s also found that many students, particularly boys, were disengaging from the old Junior Certificate as it lacked relevance in their lives.
“Essentially the Junior Certificate had become a ‘mini-Leaving Certificate’ and had no identity of its own. There was an emphasis on examinations rather than learning. There was also a global shift in curricula that questioned the emphasis on learning pre-scribed content rather than developing important universal skills”.
The changes commenced in 2014 and were introduced on a phased basis over the next six years.
The UL team don’t see our roles as evaluating teachers or schools and instead we want to tell teachers and schools’ stories of their experiences of the changes
There are a lot of different dimensions to the changes
“The changes that were implemented were far-reaching and ambitious in their scale. It was one of the largest and most extensive curriculum changes in the history of the state and there is a great deal that we are learning from it.
“There are a lot of different dimensions to the changes. Amongst them is a stronger focus on the development of key skills for students and students’ well-being. Subjects are less descriptive and are instead defined by key learning outcomes rather than a list of content. This gives teachers greater scope and professional autonomy to determine how those learning outcomes are achieved.
“There was also the goal of shifting assessment from summative assessment to more formative assessment so that it would take the emphasis off exams and lessen the pressure experienced by students.
“Common–level specifications were introduced in most subjects rather than higher and ordinary-level curricula to make learning more inclusive - differentiating learners in that manner at such a young age can be very divisive and damaging to students.”
Initially, school-based assessment was to be introduced, although this did not materialise as envisaged. Teachers’ unions resisted a plan to assess their own students. It was later agreed that teachers would conduct classroom-based assessments (CBAs), but the marks to be awarded for these tasks were not implemented as planned.
“Project-based learning tasks were introduced into all subjects to provide greater scope and flexibility and to engage students. Take for example the subject of history, students now complete classroom-based assessment projects where they can select a topic of their choosing and undertake a project on it. This really engages students in the subject.
“In the area of science, the subject is less defined by a list of content and is now guided by key learning outcomes that students need to achieve. So instead of learning off science content, teachers can select what topics they would like to use to address key skills,” explained Professor McGarr.
We interview teachers, students, and parents in each school to capture their experiences of the changes
“Project-based learning tasks were introduced into all subjects to provide greater scope and flexibility and to engage students. Take for example the subject of history, students now complete classroom-based assessment projects where they can select a topic of their choosing and undertake a project on it. This really engages students in the subject.
“In the area of science, the subject is less defined by a list of content and is now guided by key learning outcomes that students need to achieve. So instead of learning off science content, teachers can select what topics they would like to use to address key skills,” explained Professor McGarr.
The first interim report by the UL research team was published in October 2022 and provided initial insights into schools’ experiences of working with the Junior Cycle Framework since its introduction in 2015. This first report drew on the views of stakeholders, school principals and teacher survey responses.
“Our initial interim report was presented after the Covid-related restrictions were lifted and so it is not surprising that schools reported that Covid had stifled progress in the implementation of the changes. For example, many schools had started to change the layout of classrooms from students sitting in fixed rows of seating to layouts where students worked together around tables so that they could collaborate and engage in project work, but Covid restrictions reversed much of this”.
“The early report also found that there was a collective agreement that there was a need for curriculum change but that schools appeared to be at different stages of this journey towards change. It was also evident that teacher collaboration had increased significantly and that there was evidence that classroom practices were beginning to shift from more teacher-centred to more student-centred in nature.”
The second interim research report published in April 2023 drew from in-depth case studies of a representative sample of 12 schools. As well as a continuing focus on the perspectives of teachers, the second report included the views of students and parents for the first time, with input from 1,830 students in Junior Cycle.
“We interview teachers, students, and parents in each school to capture their experiences of the changes. This rich detailed qualitative work complements the larger quantitative data from the teacher surveys. The school principal interviews and interviews with wider educational stakeholders also give additional perspectives so we can capture the complexities of the changes.”
The insights show that the rationale for change as set out in the Framework is supported by teachers, students, and parents. Teachers reported that student learning was positively impacted by the changes with students having a greater voice, responsibility, and ownership of their learning, and more collaborative and engaging classrooms.
“These case studies give a rich picture of the experiences of the schools. It was evident that there were signs of change but that schools were at different stages of implementation of the changes.”
While our work is ongoing and there is a lot of data yet to analyse, it is evident that the changes have resulted in some positive changes in schools. Students enjoy the shift towards learning and comment very positively about the project work that has been introduced
Professor McGarr with Dr Orla McCormack
The findings also revealed concerns among principals and teachers over a misalignment between junior and senior cycle.
“There was also evidence that the high-stakes examinations of the Leaving Certificate had a backwash effect and influenced the extent to which schools received and implemented the changes. There was a perceived gap between the aims of the new Junior Cycle and the goals of the traditional Leaving Certificate.”
“The Junior Cycle aimed to encourage the development of key skills and emphasise learning and engagement over examination preparation whereas many teachers were concerned with students’ preparations for the Leaving Certificate courses, so there was little continuity between the two.”
“We also found evidence of a mismatch between the intended goals of the reforms, part of which was to shift emphasis from terminal exams to formative assessment, and how it was actually realised in schools where the same emphasis on terminal exams remained.”
With the third report due for publication in Spring 2024, each interim report is presented to the Board for Junior Cycle and the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment Boards. These boards oversee the implementation of the changes, and the UL research helps to inform their work. But what questions do these changes raise about the future of education and curriculum change in Ireland?
“While our work is ongoing and there is a lot of data yet to analyse, it is evident that the changes have resulted in some positive changes in schools. Students enjoy the shift towards learning and comment very positively about the project work that has been introduced,” said Professor McGarr.
“There is also evidence that many of the key skills that the reforms aimed to focus on are being achieved and they are having a very beneficial impact on students. They are more confident, and articulate and are taking greater responsibility for their own learning. The emphasis on well-being was also a great help for students during and after COVID-19.
“Teachers are also collaborating a lot more than before and there are signs that it has improved student-teacher relationships in schools. While there is no doubt that great effort and work has been put in by teachers to realise these changes, the research has however highlighted the impact of high stakes testing on students’ experiences of schools and how this can influence the extent to which changes of this nature can take root. It also highlights the impact of the compromises that were made due to the resistance of particular stakeholder groups to the reforms. These compromises have inhibited the full realisation of the reforms leading to a lack of coherence between the aims, learning outcomes and their assessment," said Professor McGarr.
This UL research is deemed by the NCCA to be of major significance to the NCCA’s work supporting schools and the wider education system. The research team will continue to work closely with schools and stakeholders in the coming months with the final report due for publication in late 2024. When completed, the four reports will offer a full and comprehensive picture of the impact the Framework for Junior Cycle is having on student learning and teachers’ experiences in schools across Ireland.
