Drama (as a subject!)

cailin_donn

OK, here goes, I'm going into 5th year and I was thinking, shouldn't Drama be an examinable subject? Very like Music, but instead of studying composers, singers and songs we could study directors, actors, plays, classic films etc...

And, for a practical, we would act out scenes or something like that. Does anyone agree with me or have I completely lost it now?

PurpleFistMixer

That sounds like it would be pretty cool. I guess you could argue that drama is an element of the english course... so if you had an english "oral" (option maybe!) that was drama-related... I'm not sure really.

But definitely, there need to be more not-strictly-academic subjects.

Niamh-17

I agree, i think drama would be great as a leaving cert subject, i know i would certainly take it anyways! But i also think PurpleFistMixer has a point by saying it is an element of English....but still Drama as a subject would be so cool! We had drama class twice a week when in Transition Year which i throughly enjoyed.

Fad

Itd be such a nightmare to examine

Just like music i suppose. I dunno, while i dislike the leaving cert in general (i know roughly what i want to do in life so a broad base education is kinda pointless for me, Alevel ftw:p) i think we have a fairly ok mix of subjects. And i really only ever thought as drama as a more an extra ciricular thing.

If a decent syllabus was introduced(meaning NO Shakespeare!) then yes it would be a great subject but as always the department of education would botch it


Then again theyre learning.

KeyLimePie

I think it's a total joke honestly:)
it'd be full of dossers!

They do it in england, enough said

KnifeWRENCH

KeyLimePie wrote: »

I think it's a total joke honestly:)
it'd be full of dossers!

They do it in england, enough said

yeah but so was Ag Science in our school!

Just because some people would take it as a doss class doesn't mean that others wouldn't do well and excel at it.

I wouldn't have done it myself, but it could work with a good syllabus.

brianthebard

Fad wrote: »

If a decent syllabus was introduced(meaning NO Shakespeare!) then yes it would be a great subject but as always the department of education would botch it Then again theyre learning.

theres no such thing as a decent syllabus without Shakespeare.FFS,kids today...

KnifeWRENCH

Fad wrote: »

If a decent syllabus was introduced(meaning NO Shakespeare!) then yes it would be a great subject but as always the department of education would botch it

You want a drama syllabus without the most renowned dramatisit of all time?
You may not like Shakespeare, but he's a pretty damn important figure in the history of drama and literature.

I did Macbeth for the LC and actually quite liked it! And English was one of my least favourite subjects.

Fad

square_igloo wrote: »

You want a drama syllabus without the most renowned dramatisit of all time?
You may not like Shakespeare, but he's a pretty damn important figure in the history of drama and literature.

I did Macbeth for the LC and actually quite liked it! And English was one of my least favourite subjects.

My problem is, that the language used in Shakespearean plays is so different to English that we use today, thus i personally dont understand the point of studying them. Anyway that's besides the point.

PurpleFistMixer

So there's no point in studying drama in other languages then? : p

Fad

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

So there's no point in studying drama in other languages then? : p

Nope, dont wan dem far-en-ers tinkin dey can fookin rool da place, do we luv?

(Of course theres scope for drama in other languages, after all did they not put on a play recently about Ballymun, Waiting for Ikea, was like they we speaking in tongues )

(Any language other than Shakespearean and Northside )

(Take this seriously at your peril)

(In retrospect this post makes no sense but how and ever:pac:)

KnifeWRENCH

Fad wrote: »

My problem is, that the language used in Shakespearean plays is so different to English that we use today, thus i personally dont understand the point of studying them. Anyway that's besides the point.

Well the point in studying them would be that Shakespeare is such an influential and celebrated playwright, and possibly the most well known literary figure ever.

How about a syllabus with optional Shakespeare? Then you wouldn't have to do it, but others could if they so wished.

Corruptedmorals

Maybe, but then it might turn into the slippery slope that the A-Levels are...some of their subjects are ridiculous and the unis there are going mad and refusing entry with them, quite rightly.

PurpleFistMixer

Is their problem not that some subjects are far easier than others? If it was ensured that drama wasn't just a dos subject, then it could work.
That said, it seems like they went too far with that for LC Art, I mean, what, less than 1% of people get A1s, compared with 10% or more for other subjects? Madness! Sparta.

KeyLimePie

applied performing arts....food studies....philosphy.....sociology....citizenship studies....thinking skills.......dance......world development.....moving image arts....divinity.....critical thinking.......

that is the slippery slope that we will go on if we allow drama to become a subject!!!! Look at england, they've allowed the students to take pointless subjects such as DRAMA instead of maths or english and now they're churning out idiots who's only dream is to marry a footballer and appear in chicago in brighton!

and btw:Pi didn't read Corruptedmorals post before but he has a good point:P

Piste

Food studies would be interesting, but I think that's mainly covered in Home Ec and Biology.

Fad

KeyLimePie wrote: »

applied performing arts....food studies....philosphy.....sociology....citizenship studies....thinking skills.......dance......world development.....moving image arts....divinity.....critical thinking.......

that is the slippery slope that we will go on if we allow drama to become a subject!!!! Look at england, they've allowed the students to take pointless subjects such as DRAMA instead of maths or english and now they're churning out idiots who's only dream is to marry a footballer and appear in chicago in brighton!

and btw:Pi didn't read Corruptedmorals post before but he has a good point:P

The thing is, most schools dont offer those subjects, and the majority that do, are ''Tech'' schools (well according a friend of mine up north) and the people who take such subjects end up taking similar enough subjects if and when they get to university. Say for forensics in Uni you'd need Biology, Chemistry and something else, its not like taking ICT, Citizenship and Divinity to take Medicine you have to meet fairly strict metriculation conditions.

As for taking Drama instead of Maths or English, GCSEs are at a much much higher standard than the Junior Cert and the Alevels ae like first year University here. So they dont nessecarily need to take Maths or English to any furthur level.

cailin_donn

no,no, no. you got me wrong KeyLimePie!

I didn't say take Drama instead of Irish, English or Maths. But as an option. Like me, for example, I'm doing Art, History, German and Biology. I hate Biology, detest it, but I had to keep it on because there was nothing else! I dont like Geography, Buisness or Science, and the only other options were Home Ec, Music and French (all of which I gave up after first year) so what was I to do? I'm going to find myself wasting precious study time to catch up on Biology and wrap my head around it that it will affect my results.

If Drama was offered there would be the advantage of
1) Doing a subject that interests me and I want to pursue in College
2)Getting some backround knowledge so I wont be going into College, never having done a Drama class in my life.

And, OK, maybe it's leading down a slippery slope, but maybe its opening doors?

spurious

Fad wrote: »

GCSEs are at a much much higher standard than the Junior Cert and the Alevels ae like first year University here

A-Levels are quite a high standard, as they should be when people are generally only doing three, but I can't agree with you on the standard of GCSE.

KnifeWRENCH

KeyLimePie wrote: »

applied performing arts....food studies....philosphy.....sociology....citizenship studies....thinking skills.......dance......world development.....moving image arts....divinity.....critical thinking.......

that is the slippery slope that we will go on if we allow drama to become a subject!!!! Look at england, they've allowed the students to take pointless subjects such as DRAMA instead of maths or english and now they're churning out idiots who's only dream is to marry a footballer and appear in chicago in brighton!

and btw:Pi didn't read Corruptedmorals post before but he has a good point:P

Wow, lots of generalisations there.

Firstly, if you think Sociology is easy, talk to anyone who did it college. I don't know anyone who did Sociology that said it was easy.
I think it would be interesting to have Sociology at Leaving Cert. Same with Philosophy. Neither would be a "doss" subject but would prepare students who wanted to do them in college.

"Food studies" - we do that in Biology and Home Ec.
"World Development" - we study that as part of Geography.

Why do you think Drama is a pointless subject? If someone wants to study drama at 3rd level, then it's anything but pointless.

English and Maths are compulsory for Leaving Cert - introducing drama would not affect this. So using those two subjects as examples was a bit stupid, tbh.

KeyLimePie

cailin_donn wrote: »

no,no, no. you got me wrong KeyLimePie!

I didn't say take Drama instead of Irish, English or Maths. But as an option. Like me, for example, I'm doing Art, History, German and Biology. I hate Biology, detest it, but I had to keep it on because there was nothing else! I dont like Geography, Buisness or Science, and the only other options were Home Ec, Music and French (all of which I gave up after first year) so what was I to do? I'm going to find myself wasting precious study time to catch up on Biology and wrap my head around it that it will affect my results.

If Drama was offered there would be the advantage of
1) Doing a subject that interests me and I want to pursue in College
2)Getting some backround knowledge so I wont be going into College, never having done a Drama class in my life.

And, OK, maybe it's leading down a slippery slope, but maybe its opening doors?

I know what you meant, I was just predicting what would happen if drama were to be a subject

square_igloo wrote: »

Wow, lots of generalisations there.

Firstly, if you think Sociology is easy, talk to anyone who did it college. I don't know anyone who did Sociology that said it was easy.
I think it would be interesting to have Sociology at Leaving Cert. Same with Philosophy. Neither would be a "doss" subject but would prepare students who wanted to do them in college.

"Food studies" - we do that in Biology and Home Ec.
"World Development" - we study that as part of Geography.

Why do you think Drama is a pointless subject? If someone wants to study drama at 3rd level, then it's anything but pointless.

English and Maths are compulsory for Leaving Cert - introducing drama would not affect this. So using those two subjects as examples was a bit stupid, tbh.

Look at england, I'm sure maths and english were compulsory for them too, then they got rid of them,
People are always saying that exams are getting easier, do we want it to get to the point where we get rid of maths and english completely?!

And most people who take doss subjects like i mentioned get refused from uni anyway

And I'm sorry but sociology and philosophy are worth nothing:)If people want to do them in college fine out, but they should stick to REAL subjects in the leaving

PurpleFistMixer

KeyLimePie wrote: »

And I'm sorry but sociology and philosophy are worth nothing:)If people want to do them in college fine out, but they should stick to REAL subjects in the leaving

This is your personal opinion. Sociology and philosophy are just as real as any other subject, provided they have an adequate syllabus/examination standard. I'm sure before Music and Art were brought in people said they were nothing subjects, but that is far from the truth.

KnifeWRENCH

KeyLimePie wrote: »

Look at england, I'm sure maths and english were compulsory for them too, then they got rid of them,
People are always saying that exams are getting easier, do we want it to get to the point where we get rid of maths and english completely?!

No, I don't. But just because it happened in England doesn't mean it will hapen here.
You seem to think introducing new subjects would somehow make English and Maths less important. I can't imagine why introducing drama, or any other new subject, would cause the SEC (or whoever is responsible) to make English and Maths optional.

KeyLimePie wrote:

And most people who take doss subjects like i mentioned get refused from uni anyway

Matriculation would clearly specify what's needed to get into Uni. Who's to say that a student with an A1 in Drama would not do well in a non-drama related 3rd level course?

KeyLimePie wrote:

And I'm sorry but sociology and philosophy are worth nothing:)If people want to do them in college fine out, but they should stick to REAL subjects in the leaving

:rolleyes:

KeyLimePie

square_igloo wrote: »

No, I don't. But just because it happened in England doesn't mean it will hapen here.
You seem to think introducing new subjects would somehow make English and Maths less important. I can't imagine why introducing drama, or any other new subject, would cause the SEC (or whoever is responsible) to make English and Maths optional.


Matriculation would clearly specify what's needed to get into Uni. Who's to say that a student with an A1 in Drama would not do well in a non-drama related 3rd level course?


:rolleyes:

good points, but no one name one person who got a decent job as a sociologist or philosopher and i'll shut up:)

KnifeWRENCH

KeyLimePie wrote: »

good points, but no one name one person who got a decent job as a sociologist or philosopher and i'll shut up:)

Stalin*

*may not be 100% accurate

Fad

spurious wrote: »

A-Levels are quite a high standard, as they should be when people are generally only doing three, but I can't agree with you on the standard of GCSE.

Alright regarding the GCSEs it was a bit of a hyperbole, but there is a considerable difference.

Also the GCSEs having some importance associated with them.

KeyLimePie

square_igloo wrote: »

Stalin*

*may not be 100% accurate

modern day would be nice

now back to why drama would suck, I believe it would lead to the slippery slope of the just terrible education system of england, where you're not forced to do maths or english, yes we there would still be matriculation subjects but most people in school will end up not going to college so those mean they don't give a crap about matriculation subjects, meaning they'll choose food studies, critical thinking and drama, leaving them without the necessary life skills they need to succeed:)

and i'm taking this from a people are stupid and must be forced into things point of view

PurpleFistMixer

Of course, Food Studies... the most useless of all skillsets.

Obviously there are people with decent jobs as sociologists or philosophers. They just may not be famous (btw, famous does not imply decent job). And there are people who studied those degrees in college, and who may not have worked directly in that area (ie they might end up working for a charity), but benefited from their college experiences and studies to have a broader outlook on life and a better understanding of either philosophy or sociology, and used this to aid them in their career.

I can't believe this is the second time I've had this argument in two days... just because something does not immediately have a job at the end of it, or just because something does not directly contribute to the material progress of civilisation (ie if it's "artsy"), does not make it any less worthwhile.

KnifeWRENCH

KeyLimePie wrote: »

now back to why drama would suck, I believe it would lead to the slippery slope of the just terrible education system of england, where you're not forced to do maths or english,

Well I don't believe that at all. We'll have to agree to disagree.

(But I'm right! )

cailin_donn

now back to why drama would suck, I believe it would lead to the slippery slope of the just terrible education system of england, where you're not forced to do maths or english, yes we there would still be matriculation subjects but most people in school will end up not going to college so those mean they don't give a crap about matriculation subjects, meaning they'll choose food studies, critical thinking and drama, leaving them without the necessary life skills they need to succeed

M'kay, first off, not everyone has to go to college! If everyone went to college we'd have no tradespeople, which is the case now so they're raising the points for college courses because too many people are going and all our tradesmen (and women) are of an older generation and they need younger ones. Even if they didnt go to college or become tradespeople, what's wrong with being a stay at home mother? Just because you or me want to do something specific with our lives doesn't mean it's what everyone should want.

And "nessecary life skills to succeed"? Please tell me how a housewife (or househusband!) will need Biology or French in their day-to-day routine!

spurious

Fad wrote: »

Also the GCSEs having some importance associated with them.

Yes but that is only because most people in Ireland stay in school longer than they do in the UK. Here all the GCSE people would be classed as early school leavers. They are not really comparable systems.

Back on topic, this argument about some subjects being useful etc. is an old one. It's the difference between education and training. If you want to learn how to think and use your brain and thus, in theory, be able to apply the thinking skills to all situations, study philosophy. If you want training for a job, do something else.

Studying something for a degree does not always mean going into that line of work. A degree in anything is a sign, supposedly, of a particular order of thinking, commitment, persistence and organisational skills. It's these things employers want, not whether you know what an anapest is.