Religion as a leaving cert exam???

Mark Hamill

Dades wrote: »

Again, I think you're misrepresenting what people are calling for. Most people here agree a generic World Religion class at some point in kids' schooling is a good idea. It's just nowhere near as important as teaching good communication or basic math skills.

This is probably my fault for backing you into a corner on one point you made, but in general we all in complete agreement!

I should restate my point, I think, just to keep things clear for Truley.
I dont think a world religion class is a particularly great idea. It is certainly a much better idea than the very christian orientated religion class I got, but I dont certainly dont think it is nearly so important as to be examined along side other more useful classes in the LC. I think any good points from world religion class will come from general ethics classes and debating classes (I explained why before)$ and that they will do them better.

Dades

Mark Hamill wrote: »

It is certainly a much better idea than the very christian orientated religion class I got, but I dont certainly dont think it is nearly so important as to be examined along side other more useful classes in the LC. I think any good points from world religion class will come from general ethics classes and debating classes (I explained why before)$ and that they will do them better.

TBH I don't see why it can't be a LC subject - it is, I assume, like most LC subjects not compulsory. Once it's not forced on people it can be picked up by whoever wants to do it, like Classical Studies or Home Ec.

I also think the whole "World Religion" thing would in fact be best taught under the guise of some sort of Humanities/Ethics/Civics class. It's worth teaching, as well as the stuff you mention above.

Mark Hamill

Dades wrote: »

TBH I don't why it can't be a LC subject - it is, I assume, like most LC subjects not compulsory. Once it's not forced on people it can be picked up by whoever wants to do it, like Classical Studies or Home Ec.

I also think the whole "World Religion" thing would in fact be best taught under the guise of some sort of Humanities/Ethics/Civics class. It's worth teaching, as well as the stuff you mention above.

I'd agree with this, as long as it isn't compulsory, like you said. Can anyone confirm if it is or isn't compulsory?

Risteard

We didn't have Religion as an exam subject but we used the books anyway. They're pretty much about world religions.

I wouldn't mind religion being taught as an exam subject as long as it wasn't biased towards one religion in particular. I'm sure there are lots of people out there that are interested in different religions without actually believing in them.

Truley

Ok let me put what I initially said into perspective. I did my leaving certificate in 2007.

English: I learned off an essay for every topic that came up and regurgitated it on the day, it didn't teach me much by way of creative writing. Got a B1 higher level, you've read enough of my posts to see that that doesn't say much about the standard of leaving cert English :P

Maths: An important skill to grasp and one of the few subjects in second level that you can't just fluke as an exam. I got an A2 and it was a requirement to get into my university course. But since then I have never used more than basic primary school arithmetic, in fact I had a look at by brother's exam papers this week and I couldn't even tackle the '(b)' questions. I haven't used leaving cert maths since leaving school

Irish: Bahahahahahahahahahahahaha

French: It's good to learn a language, and it is a requirement for (some) third level courses. However I never persued it beyond leaving cert.

Business Studies: Learned off a few definitions, hasn't helped me beyond school. Isn't a requirement for third level. Got an A1.

Physics: See maths

History: Course is a load of sh*te heavily watered down and incredibly biased. Not a requirement for college.

Religion: The formal exam subject wasn't an option when I did the leaving. We only did the 'informal Catholicism classes. My brother is taking religion and he and his friends love it, and not because it's a doss subject it's actually meant to be quite tough. He reckons it will benefit him in his chosen career (journalism) more than maths or biology.

So yes I still stand by my opinion that religion is equally as relevant as any of the other leaving certificate subjects. I'm not saying religion is extra special or 'better' than any other subject, I'm saying that it's no less educational or applicable than the supposedly 'real' subjects. In some cases it is more relevant for people in thier future study and career. Does that clarify what I'm trying to say any better?

Mark Hamill wrote: »

So you dont deny its a defense mechanism for you to discount other peoples criticisims?

Oy vey I'm not here for a petty argument. Get a saucer of milk and chill out will ye :rolleyes:

Dades wrote: »

This is probably my fault for backing you into a corner on one point you made, but in general we all in complete agreement!

All together now! *I'd like to teach, the world to sing...* :pac:

Mark Hamill

Truley wrote: »

So yes I still stand by my opinion that religion is equally as relevant as any of the other leaving certificate subjects. I'm not saying religion is extra special or 'better' than any other subject, I'm saying that it's no less educational or applicable than the supposedly 'real' subjects. In some cases it is more relevant for people in thier future study and career. Does that clarify what I'm trying to say any better?

But now you've just ended up with a moot point, of sorts. Everyone is different, everyone is going to have subjects that will help them better in what they do in later life. Science and maths will help the people who go into science, history and classics the historians and archaologists etc. Just because religion helps you doesn't mean its going to be anything special to anyone else. And it certainly doesn't mean that there can be better ways to teach the fundamental points.
I suppose the point has now become is religion class (the world religion class described before) something that every school kid should do? Should it be compulsory? I dont think so. Like I said before, ethics classes and debating classes will teach kids how to allow for other ideas, how to fairly discuss them and how rebute bad ones.

Dades

Mark Hamill wrote: »

But now you've just ended up with a moot point, of sorts. Everyone is different, everyone is going to have subjects that will help them better in what they do in later life. Science and maths will help the people who go into science, history and classics the historians and archaologists etc. Just because religion helps you doesn't mean its going to be anything special to anyone else. And it certainly doesn't mean that there can be better ways to teach the fundamental points.

I agree. In my real life experience, knowledge of world religions was a complete irrelevancy. I have to go onto Boards to even find any kind of discussion on the matter.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I suppose the point has now become is religion class (the world religion class described before) something that every school kid should do? Should it be compulsory? I dont think so. Like I said before, ethics classes and debating classes will teach kids how to allow for other ideas, how to fairly discuss them and how rebute bad ones.

I think ignoring religion in a course on ethics/humanities or whatever is like ignoring the elephant in the room. Much as I'd love to see religion and superstition fade into myth, it the supposed source of much of the worlds 'morality' for better and frequently worse.

History class covers the Dark Ages as well as the Renaissance. :pac:

Mark Hamill

Dades wrote: »

I agree. In my real life experience, knowledge of world religions was a complete irrelevancy. I have to go onto Boards to even find any kind of discussion on the matter.

I think ignoring religion in a course on ethics/humanities or whatever is like ignoring the elephant in the room. Much as I'd love to see religion and superstition fade into myth, it the supposed source of much of the worlds 'morality' for better and frequently worse.

History class covers the Dark Ages as well as the Renaissance. :pac:

I'm not saying religion should be entirely ignored, it would have a place, for the moment, as exercises in ethics and debating classes. Its just I wouldn't see the need to have a class entirely on the subject of religion at all.