From Leaving CertiFiCate to Leaving SChooL a Longitudinal Study ...

Leaving Certificate Exam Performance 109
The majority (69 per cent) of students in the case-study schools took 7
exam subjects while almost a quarter took 8 exam subjects. Differences
were evident by Leaving Certificate programme, with the majority (85 per
cent) of LCE students taking 7 subjects while the majority (70 per cent) of
LCVP students took 8 subjects. This reflects the way in which some of the
case-study schools time-tabled the LCVP modules as an additional subject
(see Smyth and Calvert, 2011). The proportion of students taking 8 exam
subjects varied significantly across schools, with students in Hay Street, a
working-class school, and Dawson Street, a mixed intake school, more
likely to do so than those attending other schools. This pattern largely reflected
differential provision and take-up of LCVP across the schools.
Before looking at the factors associated with Leaving Certificate exam
grades, it is worth exploring variation in the proportion taking higher level
subjects in the exam. Figure 4.1 above revealed significant variation between
the case-study schools in the average number of higher level subjects
taken. However, the schools differ markedly in their student intake
and in previous Junior Certificate exam performance (see Smyth et al.,
2007). The question is therefore whether variation in higher level take-up
is accounted for by prior differences. To try to unpack this variation, Figure
4.8 shows the average number of higher level subjects taken by students
who scored in the lowest two Junior Certificate grade quintiles, that
is, in the lowest 40 per cent of scores. The difference between the working-class
schools and other schools is not as stark as in Figure 4.1; it appears
therefore that the lower prevalence of higher level take-up in working-class
schools reflects, in part, the prior achievement levels of their students.
However, even within the same achievement band, take-up of
higher level is found to be lower in working-class schools and higher in
Fig Lane, one of the middle-class schools. The exception to this pattern is
Harris Street, a middle-class girls’ school, where take-up of higher level
subjects is relatively low among the low-achieving group. In contrast to
the situation for those with lower Junior Certificate grades depicted in Figure
4.8, there is very little between-school variation for the top quintile
(fifth) of students; the patterns for this group of students are not depicted
here because these students are not represented in all schools. It would
appear therefore that school policy, teacher and student expectations have
more impact on lower-achieving students’ take-up of higher level subjects.