Enda Kenny to make irish optional?

deise go deo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

No better or worse than any other subject.
Why not make computer science compulsory instead? Everyone on each needs it and it gives you smarts as good as Latin/Sanskrit/Irish/Linear B whatever.

That is not the case, Language learning is very important in an educational sense. Learning a second language has proven benefits for cognative development.

Dan_Solo

deise go deo wrote: »

That is not the case, Language learning is very important in an educational sense. Learning a second language has proven benefits for cognative development.

As opposed to learning nothing at all? Yeah, thought so.

Insect Overlord

Dan_Solo wrote: »

As opposed to learning nothing at all? Yeah, thought so.

As opposed to learning everything through a single language, which is what you seem so strongly in favour of.

Dan_Solo

Insect Overlord wrote: »

As opposed to learning everything through a single language, which is what you seem so strongly in favour of.

Go on then, show me the data that proves learning a second language is the causative factor in achieving better grades.

deise go deo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Go on then, show me the data that proves learning a second language is the causative factor in achieving better grades.

''The person who has never comprehended, spoken, read or written a language other than his mother tongue has little or no perspective on his own language,...he has never penetrated the rich areas of learning and experience lying beyond monolingual communication."

data from the Admission Testing Program of the College Board show a definite positive correlation between Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and the study of foreign languages. In one recent test group, for example, students who had taken no foreign language in high school achieved a mean score of 366 on the verbal portion of the SAT, and 409 on the math portion. Students who had taken only one year of a foreign language had slightly higher scores (378 and 416), whereas students with two years of foreign language showed more dramatic increases (417 and 463). Each additional year of language study brought a further rise in scores, with students who had studied a language for five years or more achieving an average of 504 on the verbal and 535 on the math portion of the exam.

The College Board also calculated correlations between length of study of certain subjects, including English, math, biological sciences, physical sciences, and social studies, and SAT scores, and found that in almost all cases the longer a student studied one of these subjects, the higher were the scores. However, the verbal scores of students who had taken four or five years of a foreign laguage were higher than verbal scores of students who had studied any other subject for an equal length of time. Similar results have been obtained by other researchers who have examined foreign language study and SAT scores.

Eric Digests

Intellectual Potential

Students fluent in two language score higher in both verbal and non-verbal intelligence.
Students studying a second language are superior in divergent thinking tasks and in memory ability and attention span.
Scholastic Achievement

Second language students have higher test scores in reading, language and mathematics.
Each additional year of second language training created a greater positive differential compared to students not receiving a second language.
Effect on First Language

Second language education significantly strengthens first language skills in areas of reading, English vocabulary, grammar and communication skills.
The earlier the start, the greater the positive effect on the first language.

Gov of Alberta: Education

The review of existing research on the impact of second language education showed a set of
consistent findings.
There is a positive effect on the student’s intellectual potential. Gains in both verbal and nonverbal intelligence, improvements in divergent thinking as well as enhancement of memory and
listening skills are all found to be associated with second language instruction.
Student achievement is improved, as is witnessed by research that studies results on standardized
tests in core subject areas. The research also shows that second language education improves the student’s skills in their first language

Impact of Second language Education on Intellectual Development



Lets see your supporting evidence for your claims.

Dan_Solo

None of those studies have controls. Obviously, smarter children will tend to do well in all subjects and hence learn a second language to a higher degree more easily.
In the absence of a study following the development of similarly academically gifted children with and without second language study, there is zero evidence presented that the second language is the causative factor.

deirdremf

Adrian009 wrote: »

That's what the Gaelscoillna are for, so if people wish to send their children to them, they can.

If that was true, things would be a lot better than they are.
Unfortunately, regardless how often you write it, people keep coming back with the same crap. Let me spell it out once again for those who are not so smart.
It is difficult to get a place in a Gaelscoil.
The Dept. of Education refuses to recognise new Gaelscoileanna.
There is more demand than places.
Surveys have shown that up to 25% of people would send their kids to a Gaelscoil if one was available - but only something like 6 or 7 per cent actually get the opportunity at primary level; and a lot less at secondary level.

If there was a place in a Gaelscoil for everyone who wanted one, then I'd be happy to sit down and talk about curtailing the requirement for those who are against Irish, after the Junior Cert.
But lets see some movement first to provide places for those who want their kids educated through Irish, by way of proof that FG is serious when it says that it is in favour of promoting Irish in the education system.

deise go deo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

None of those studies have controls. Obviously, smarter children will tend to do well in all subjects and hence learn a second language to a higher degree more easily.
In the absence of a study following the development of similarly academically gifted children with and without second language study, there is zero evidence presented that the second language is the causative factor.

Read slower next time.

In one recent test group.....students who had taken no foreign language in high school achieved a mean score of 366 on the verbal portion of the SAT, and 409 on the math portion.....students who had studied a language for five years or more achieving an average of 504 on the verbal and 535 on the math portion of the exam

Kids who studied a second language did better acedemicly than kids who did not study a second language, how much more clear cut dose it need to be for you?

If you still dont get it then have a look through this: What the Research Shows

Is that good enough for you?:rolleyes:



Now if you want to continue to argue that Learning a second language is not particulary Beneficial then please Provide some evidience to back it up.

deirdremf

Dan_Solo wrote: »

None of those studies have controls. Obviously, smarter children will tend to do well in all subjects and hence learn a second language to a higher degree more easily.
In the absence of a study following the development of similarly academically gifted children with and without second language study, there is zero evidence presented that the second language is the causative factor.

I think you will find that the Canadians have done every sort of study, with relevant controls. They have been very thorough in their promotion of bilingualism. I am certain of this, as I did a study on Canadian bilingualism for an organisation I worked for.
There have been numerous studies done that show people with more than one language have a more flexible manner of thinking. You have rubbished them all, apparently.

But then your real agenda is the one below:

Dan_Solo wrote: »

I wasn't necessarily talking about a language at all as an alternative. If people don't want to do a second language, so what? We all speak the "Lingua Franca" of the Western world and for the foreseeable that's enough.
Give the kids double maths or science to make up!

Well, the "lingua franca" of the western world may be enough for you, but you are in a small minority of maybe 3% or 4% of the world's population who only speak English.

Now I'm not saying all native English speakers should go out and learn a second language, any more than I think all Chinese should, or all Arabs should. On an individual basis, knowing a second language gives you a door into a world you couldn't otherwise enter, and that is a valuable experience for everyone who does so.

But what I do feel is important is that all Irish people should have the door into the Irish language opened for them, as it helps make them understand the country they live in, if only in allowing them to understand the placenames of the towns and villages they live in.
Ballydehob, Tullamore and Tanderagee don't mean anything, and will tell you nothing about your surroundings or history. They are no more than gobbledegook. But the original versions, the REAL names, the ones used by Irish speakers do have meaning.
However, you seem to feel that this is worthless to you.
You are a modern-day unionist: not a political unionist, but a linguistic unionist, and I would not take that right away from you. I will not allow you to take my rights away, though, nor those of my children or those of the country's children as a whole.

deirdremf

deise go deo wrote: »

Read slower next time.

Kids who studied a second language did better acedemicly than kids who did not study a second language, how much more clear cut dose it need to be for you?

If you still dont get it then have a look through this: What the Research Shows

Is that good enough for you?:rolleyes:

Now if you want to continue to argue that Learning a second language is not particulary Beneficial then please Provide some evidience to back it up.

Déise, you're probably wasting your time here.
Dannyboy will just come back and tell you that only the smart kids did the second language, and that is why they got good results.

deise go deo

deirdremf wrote: »

Déise, you're probably wasting your time here.
Dannyboy will just come back and tell you that only the smart kids did the second language, and that is why they got good results.

Only smart kids doing a second language would explain the difference between those who did a second language and those who dident.(If we ignore how unlikely this is to happen in practice)
It wouldn't explain the improvement in results between those who had studied a second language based on amount of time the second language had been learned.

Insect Overlord

We've been wasting our time replying to his seafóid for a fortnight now. He'll keep replying with total and utter ráiméis until we give up or get in trouble for reacting to it. The guy knows exactly what he's doing, and he's getting away with it too.

Dan_Solo

All very entertaining flailing about, but you even had to admit yourselves that there are no proper controls for this. Equal academic grades -/+ second language for X years -> retested academic results.
That's how studies for a causative factor are done. Maybe if you spent more time on stats and less on a second language you'd get this.

Dan_Solo

Insect Overlord wrote: »

We've been wasting our time replying to his seafóid for a fortnight now. He'll keep replying with total and utter ráiméis until we give up or get in trouble for reacting to it. The guy knows exactly what he's doing, and he's getting away with it too.

Getting away with what? If you don't know what a causative factor is or how you'd go about testing for one then spare us all the lame "troll" alarm just because you're embarrassing yourself.

Dan_Solo

deirdremf wrote: »

Well, the "lingua franca" of the western world may be enough for you, but you are in a small minority of maybe 3% or 4% of the world's population who only speak English.

Not contested but irrelevant.

deirdremf wrote: »

Now I'm not saying all native English speakers should go out and learn a second language, any more than I think all Chinese should, or all Arabs should. On an individual basis, knowing a second language gives you a door into a world you couldn't otherwise enter, and that is a valuable experience for everyone who does so.

Not contested, but no different from any other subject so irrelevant.

deirdremf wrote: »

But what I do feel is important is that all Irish people should have the door into the Irish language opened for them, as it helps make them understand the country they live in, if only in allowing them to understand the placenames of the towns and villages they live in.

"opened"? Are you for real? What kind of a metaphor is "an open door" for compulsory forced Irish language classes?

deirdremf wrote: »

Ballydehob, Tullamore and Tanderagee don't mean anything, and will tell you nothing about your surroundings or history. They are no more than gobbledegook. But the original versions, the REAL names, the ones used by Irish speakers do have meaning.

No idea why you would even imagine I'd be upset about this. Unless you know proto-Celtic I suppose you yourself will never know the "real" meaning either.

deirdremf wrote: »

You are a modern-day unionist: not a political unionist, but a linguistic unionist, and I would not take that right away from you. I will not allow you to take my rights away, though, nor those of my children or those of the country's children as a whole.

Better than a cultural fascist any day mate.
And who said anything about taking your "right" to speak Irish away anyway? Paranoid delusions or what!

deise go deo

Second language study benefits academic progress in other subjects

• Applying current standard practices of foreign language instruction ("Five Cs of
Communication, Culture, Connections with other disciplines, Comparisons with students'
native languages and cultures, and use of the foreign language in Communities outside the
classroom") reinforces English language course content of other coursework. (Curtain &
Dahlberg 2004)
• Learning another language can enhance knowledge of English structure and vocabulary
(Curtain & Dahlberg, 2004).
• A study of 13,200 third and fifth graders in Louisiana public schools revealed that, regardless
of race, gender, or academic level, children taking foreign language classes did better on the
English section of the Louisiana Basic Skills Test than those who did not. (Dumas 1999)
• Strong evidence shows that time spent on foreign language study strongly reinforces the core
subject areas of reading, English language literacy, social studies and math. Foreign language
learners consistently outperform control groups in core subject areas on standardized tests,
often significantly. (Armstrong & Rogers 1997; Saunders 1998; Masciantonio 1977; Rafferty
1986; Andrade 1989; Kretschmer & Kretschmer 1989)
• One study found students scored significantly higher in math and language arts after one
semester of foreign language study 90 minutes per week. (Armstrong 1997)
• Foreign language learners consistently outperform control groups in core subject areas on
standardized tests often significantly. (Armstrong & Rogers 1997, Saunders 1998,
Masciantonio 1977, Rafferty 1986, Andrade, Kretschmer & Kretschmer 1989)
• Students who started kindergarten in the first Kansas City foreign language magnet schools
in 1988 had surpassed national averages in all subjects by the time they reached fifth
grade.These foreign language students performed especially well in mathematics. (Eaton
1994)
• Foreign language students within an urban magnet program scored well above anticipated
national norms in both reading and mathematics and higher than the average of all magnet
2school participants, despite the fact that they represent a broad cross-section of the local
community. (Andrade 1989)
• Mastering the vocabulary of a second language enhances student comprehension and abilities
in reading, writing, mathematics and other subjects. (Saville-Troike 1984)
• Bilingualism fosters the development of verbal and spatial abilities. (Diaz 1983)
• Students learning a second language in elementary school surpassed those who were not in
English reading and language arts tests. (Mavrogenes 1979).
• Early second language study promotes achievement in English vocabulary and reading skills.
(Masciantonio 1977)
• Foreign language learners consistently score higher than their non-language-learning peers in
measures of English vocabulary, particularly when the language studied has Latin roots.
(Masciantonio 1977)

The Benefits of Second Language Study



Your position has been discredited enough by now I think, so I will stop wasting my own time dealing with you until you put some evidence forward to support your position.

deirdremf

deise go deo wrote: »

The Benefits of Second Language Study



Your position has been discredited enough by now I think, so I will stop wasting my own time dealing with you until you put some evidence forward to support your position.

iirc, one curious result of studies that have been carried out was that the greater the difference between languages studied, the greater the benefits.
So learning German (which has a similar grammar to English) provided lower benefits than learning a Romance (Latin-based) language (which has different word-order, different tense structure, with synthetic rather than analytic verb-forms).

Dan_Solo

deise go deo wrote: »

Your position has been discredited enough by now I think, so I will stop wasting my own time dealing with you until you put some evidence forward to support your position.

Since you've apparently read all of the studies in that and know their methodology, could you kindly tell which ones prove that studying a second language instead of another subject improves overall academic grades with the test subjects being otherwise academically equal before random assignment to the two relevant cohorts.
(that's how you prove a factor is causative BTW)
Even then your own data says children would gain more from being taught Japanese or Cantonese!!!

Salty

Adrian009 wrote: »

QUESTION: How many pro-Irish posters here are Gaeilgeoirs?

Almost fluent, currently in 6th year.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Go on then, show me the data that proves learning a second language is the causative factor in achieving better grades.

Show me the data that indicates it's not the causative factor.

deirdremf wrote: »

Déise, you're probably wasting your time here.
Dannyboy will just come back and tell you that only the smart kids did the second language, and that is why they got good results.

He can't prove that the only children that undertook a second language were smart. That's rubbish.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Since you've apparently read all of the studies in that and know their methodology, could you kindly tell which ones prove that studying a second language instead of another subject improves overall academic grades with the test subjects being otherwise academically equal before random assignment to the two relevant cohorts.
(that's how you prove a factor is causative BTW)
Even then your own data says children would gain more from being taught Japanese or Cantonese!!!

Can you show any evidence that studying maths or science instead of a second language improves overall academic grades? Oh wait, no you can't.

Dan_Solo

You still don't know how this works, do you?
You've made a claim. You have failed to prove it. I do not have to prove the converse for your claim to remain unproven. I'll give up trying to explain to you how to prove that the second language is the causative factor and take it you either can't understand or just don't want to know.
If kids' overall academic achievements are no better whether they take business or Irish is also irrelevant, as business is useful. Irish is not. Still no case for Irish.

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

You still don't know how this works, do you?
You've made a claim. You have failed to prove it. I do not have to prove the converse for your claim to remain unproven. I'll give up trying to explain to you how to prove that the second language is the causative factor and take it you eithercan't understand or just don't want to know.
If kids' overall academic achievements are no better whether they take business or Irish is also irrelevant, as business is useful. Irish is not. Still no case for Irish.

You have ALSO made a claim - that being that second language doesn't improve overall academic grades. I'm simply asking you to prove that this counter-claim to the pro-language arguments is true.

You have also ignored all references to reform of the curriculum. Irish cannot be demoted to a non-compulsory subject if reform doesn't occur.
I have asked before, what are your opinions on reform? Surely you're not against improving the language?

irish pavee

SeanMadd wrote: »

Just saw this:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gf8jm-TLQPjLWIxuJak29bUDxoQA?docId=N0602721297099463953A

Quite frankly I'm kind of saddened by that fact. I really wish Irish was more spoken in Ireland, and although I'm not great myself, I think that everyone should be learning our native language.

Thoughts?

its just like my languageit all most gone cant

Ado75

Irish should be optional at all levels in the system. It is of no value to those who will never use it anyway. Like me. I had no desire to learn Irish at school and yet was forced to endure thousands of hours of lessons in it. Children should have the option of other languages at primary level.

The laughable thing is that as a citizen of this "Republic" you can be discriminated against for a lack of Irish. Especially when it comes to public sector jobs. Sections of middle class Ireland use the language and the fact they send their kids to fee paying Irish schools as a tool to maintain a British type "Old School Tie" system of elitism. Those who say this is BS have their heads in the sand. These realities are ever present in places like UCD and TCD with the D4 set and carry on into society as a whole. When you are not born to these sections of society it is as plain as the nose on your face. I remember in school teachers speaking Irish in front of parents from working class areas as an in your face form of elitism.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

You have ALSO made a claim - that being that second language doesn't improve overall academic grades. I'm simply asking you to prove that this counter-claim to the pro-language arguments is true.

In the absence of any proof there is an effect, I will assume there is no effect.
I do not need to prove anything to be perfectly logical in assuming your unproven claim can be ignored.
Are you a Christian fundamentalist by any chance? They love to pull that "you can't prove it's not there" nonsense.:rolleyes:

Salty

Ado75 wrote: »

Irish should be optional at all levels in the system. It is of no value to those who will never use it anyway. Like me. I had no desire to learn Irish at school and yet was forced to endure thousands of hours of lessons in it. Children should have the option of other languages at primary level.

The laughable thing is that as a citizen of this "Republic" you can be discriminated against for a lack of Irish. Especially when it comes to public sector jobs. Sections of middle class Ireland use the language and the fact they send their kids to fee paying Irish schools as a tool to maintain a British type "Old School Tie" system of elitism. Those who say this is BS have their heads in the sand. These realities are ever present in places like UCD and TCD with the D4 set and carry on into society as a whole. When you are not born to these sections of society it is as plain as the nose on your face. I remember in school teachers speaking Irish in front of parents from working class areas as an in your face form of elitism.

When you were 4 or 5 years old starting primary school, did you have a desire to learn any other language?

Didn't realise that there were fee-paying Irish schools in Dublin. There are none in Cork, either primary or secondary level. And I doubt there are fee-paying Gaelscoileanna in any other part of the country other than Dublin. Things are different outside The Pale, believe it or not.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

I have asked before, what are your opinions on reform? Surely you're not against improving the language?

I couldn't give a hoot about reform. If you want to speak Irish, Swahili, Klingon whatever good luck to you. What relevance does that have to forcing people to learn a useless subject?

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

When you were 4 or 5 years old starting primary school, did you have a desire to learn any other language?

When I was 10 I wanted to be a Jedi, but there were no classes provided in the school I went to.:(

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

In the absence of any proof there is an effect, I will assume there is no effect.
I do not need to prove anything to be perfectly logical in assuming your unproven claim can be ignored.
Are you a Christian fundamentalist by any chance? They love to pull that "you can't prove it's not there" nonsense.:rolleyes:

I'm a regular 6th year student. Stop rubbishing my opinions. You're constantly asking people to supply you with your precious data. They provide it, ask you to provide yours with your counter-claims, and all of a sudden you have none, as indicated above.

Reform of the curriculum would make it more accessible to students. If it was taught in the same way as French or German, it would be a completely different situation. It is completely relevant. In many secondary schools, French is the only European language available from 1st to 6th year. It has to be undertaken by students who want to go to University. Is French, therefore, forced on people?

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

When I was 10 I wanted to be a Jedi, but there were no classes provided in the school I went to.:(

And you have the cheek to preach about "irrelevant, anecdotal" information.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

And you have the cheek to preach about "irrelevant, anecdotal" information.

Yes, I do, in the form of a sarcastic analogy to your ridiculous question.
Hear a whooshing noise up there anywhere?

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Yes, I do, in the form of a sarcastic analogy to your ridiculous question.
Hear a whooshing noise up there anywhere?

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
My "ridiculous" question was relevant to the quote I had from Ado75.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

I'm a regular 6th year student. Stop rubbishing my opinions. You're constantly asking people to supply you with your precious data. They provide it, ask you to provide yours with your counter-claims, and all of a sudden you have none, as indicated above.

I will rubbish anything I like that doesn't make sense.
I do not need to provide any evidence of a counter claim to show your own claim is not proven.
Also, your school year is irrelevant. I don't have to pretend you're right because you're inexperienced.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
My "ridiculous" question was relevant to the quote I had from Ado75.

That's what everybody says who doesn't get the sarcasm, isn't it?:D

Ado75

_meehan_ wrote: »

When you were 4 or 5 years old starting primary school, did you have a desire to learn any other language?

Didn't realise that there were fee-paying Irish schools in Dublin. There are none in Cork, either primary or secondary level. And I doubt there are fee-paying Gaelscoileanna in any other part of the country other than Dublin. Things are different outside The Pale, believe it or not.

A Typically hostile response from someone who hasn't experienced the negative aspects of the Irish language within this society. Maybe fee paying was an incorrect term to use, more correct - exclusively middle class, where money for registration fees and extra curricular activities puts participation beyond the reach of other sections of society. Either way those barriers do exist in this society whether you are aware of them or not.

As regards being from the Pale, you got in one. Irish is complete irrelevance in my life or anyone I know. Yet I feel 100% Irish. You seem to suggest that because my parents had no language options for me at four or five that I should be thankful for my fruitless education in Irish.

I leaned German at second level. Which stood me in good stead as went on to work there in the 1990s. There was a complete contrast in how this language was taught to me which may account for my acquiring it and maintaining a proficiency in it. There is also the fact that Irish is/was as relevant Klingon in my day to day life.

All I'm looking for is choice. A choice which outside of the core subject of Maths and English should be permitted.

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

I will rubbish anything I like that doesn't make sense.
I do not need to provide any evidence of a counter claim to show your own claim is not proven.
Also, your school year is irrelevant. I don't have to pretend you're right because you're inexperienced.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

That's what everybody says who doesn't get the sarcasm, isn't it?:D

My posts make perfect sense.

You asked was I a Christian fundamentalist, I replied by saying no I'm a 6th year student. I'm not bringing my school year into the argument.

I get sarcasm, I just think there are far more intelligent forms of humour.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

My posts make perfect sense.

You asked was I a Christian fundamentalist, I replied by saying no I'm a 6th year student.

These aren't mutually exclusive.
So your post makes no sense.

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

These aren't mutually exclusive.
So your post makes no sense.

My posts make perfect sense = reply to your comment that they don't.

You asked was I a Christian fundamentalist and I said no I'm a 6th year student. I wasn't bringing my school year into the argument. = reply to your comment that I was trying to use my school year in the argument.

Two seperate replies to 2 different parts of your comments. Surely you could link them back to what you were saying to me?

You're nit-picking at this stage.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

You asked was I a Christian fundamentalist and I said no I'm a 6th year student. I wasn't bringing my school year into the argument.

Really? Then why did YOU bring it up?

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

You're nit-picking at this stage.

Aside from the fact that I hardly need to nitpick when I've already conclusively proven that I don't have to make any counter claim to the unsubstantiated claim that Irish helps overall student grades.
The ball was already firmly in your court, so I've no real need to sidetrack, do I?

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Really? Then why did YOU bring it up?

I was simply stating what I am. And I am a 6th year student. Not a Christian fundamentalist as you asked. This is not part of the argument. I'm not using it in the debate about Irish.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Aside from the fact that I hardly need to nitpick when I've already conclusively proven that I don't have to make any counter claim to the unsubstantiated claim that Irish helps overall student grades.
The ball was already firmly in your court, so I've no real need to sidetrack, do I?

Where did I say specifically that Irish helps overall student grades? I said other language study does.

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

I was simply stating what I am. And I am a 6th year student. Not a Christian fundamentalist as you asked. This is not part of the argument. I'm not using it in the debate about Irish.

Fine. We'll pretend you never brought it up.

_meehan_ wrote: »

Where did I say specifically that Irish helps overall student grades? I said other language study does.

Have it your way. Makes no difference to the argument.

musho

i agree

Salty

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Fine. We'll pretend you never brought it up.

Really, it was you who brought it up by asking such an idiotic question as "are you a Christian fundamentalist."

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Have it your way. Makes no difference to the argument.

Well it's true that I didn't explicitly state that learning Irish improves academic grades overall. "Have it your way" - are you still refusing to see that you were wrong on this point?

Salty

musho wrote: »

i agree

With what may I ask?

Dan_Solo

_meehan_ wrote: »

Really, it was you who brought it up by asking such an idiotic question as "are you a Christian fundamentalist."

Asking opponents to prove an absence is a common Christian fundamentalist ploy. It is idiotic of you to not see that that is what you are doing.

_meehan_ wrote: »

Well it's true that I didn't explicitly state that learning Irish improves academic grades overall. "Have it your way" - are you still refusing to see that you were wrong on this point?

Wrong on what point? That learning a second language is unproven to aid overall academic progress in a study using proper controls? Of course I might be wrong on this, but then again we know for a fact that nobody has presented any evidence that proves this theory, so it remains unproven.
The only hard evidence provided so far is that students do better learning a language as different as possible from their mother tongue. So thank you for showing that under no circumstances should Irish be taught in Irish schools to benefit students' other skills as it is far too similar English.

Hector Mildew

_meehan_ wrote: »

In many secondary schools, French is the only European language available from 1st to 6th year. It has to be undertaken by students who want to go to University. Is French, therefore, forced on people?

Not all universities require a European language, neither do the Institutes of Technology so there are options in this regard...

Why is more subject choice such a bad thing? If someone wants to study Irish they will, if not then then better that they choose a subject that they like. Why do some people feel the need to force others into studying a subject which does not suit them academically?

deise go deo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

In the absence of any proof there is an effect, I will assume there is no effect.
I do not need to prove anything to be perfectly logical in assuming your unproven claim can be ignored.
Are you a Christian fundamentalist by any chance? They love to pull that "you can't prove it's not there" nonsense.:rolleyes:

I have put forward a large body of evidence to support my position, on what basis do you ignore this?

I have shown study after study, all agreeing that there is a positive overall impact to second language learning. You have shown nothing to suggest that these study's are in error. You are simply burying your head.:rolleyes:

Hector Mildew

deise go deo wrote: »

I have shown study after study, all agreeing that there is a positive overall impact to second language learning. You have shown nothing to suggest that these study's are in error. You are simply burying your head.:rolleyes:

I din't read those studies in full, at what level does learning a second language have the most impact (I.e. Primary, JC, LC, etc.)? How would offering a choice of second language affect the results?

deise go deo

Hector Mildew wrote: »

I din't read those studies in full, at what level does learning a second language have the most impact (I.e. Primary, JC, LC, etc.)? How would offering a choice of second language affect the results?

The studies suggest that the Impact is proportional to the amount of time the second language is studied. The longer they are studied the more positive the impact.

I doubt offering a choice of second language would affect the results, though that said, the amount of difference between first and second language can be a factor.

However, the question of if learning a second language is beneficial or not and the question of Irish being compulsory are two separate Issues, I was arguing the former.

Aard

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It affects far more than just students. It affects teachers and lecturers at second and third level. It affects parents. It affects book shops and publishers. It affects policy-makers, administrative staff and researchers. There's a whole world out there beyond your secondary school classroom.

I don't think 18 year olds should be laboured with the task of propping up teachers, lecturers, parents, bookshops, policy makers... And I am someone who can and does speak the language! Turning 13 years of compulsory Irish into 11 isn't going to have such awful knock-on effects. Indeed, it might even give researchers a new line of study.