Ruairi Quinn, Education agus an Ghaeilge.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lockstep

RandomName2 wrote: »

Ah... but in which dialect?

The same dialects that are being used now.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bottle_of_Smoke

deise go deo wrote: »

So instead of Reforming it, you would make it optional so that it has to be refomed?

Sounds a little unnecessary as the first step is reform anyway.

Precisely. They've f*cked it up for 80 years I think they need a little incentive. This is the public sector we're dealing with remember.

Lets say they reform it first but its not made optional; it will be in their heads "well its going to be compulsory anyway, making it student friendly not such a big deal"

compared to

"right they're making this optional, we'd really better get our act together or there'll be no demand for the subject"

jimmycrackcorm

If any language should become compulsory then it should be Mandarin. China is the largest economic area of growth and the opportunities of tying into that should not be overlooked.

alan85

If any language should become compulsory then it should be Mandarin. China is the largest economic area of growth and the opportunities of tying into that should not be overlooked.

Cliché... Yawn...

deise go deo

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Precisely. They've f*cked it up for 80 years I think they need a little incentive. This is the public sector we're dealing with remember.

Lets say they reform it first but its not made optional; it will be in their heads "well its going to be compulsory anyway, making it student friendly not such a big deal"

compared to

"right they're making this optional, we'd really better get our act together or there'll be no demand for the subject"

Quick Fixes like 'Make it optional' and then leaving it to the same people who are responciple for the current system to sort it out is exactly the kind of poorly taught out FF type Bull that destroyed this country.

Your idea is critically flawed in that it assumes (rather oddly) that A) those responciple in the Dept of Education are activly against making Irish 'Student Friendly' now and that If Irish is made Optional they will suddenly become Pro-Active and want to make it 'Student Friendly'


This is not a very well taught out plan, and is not supported by any evidence. The Current set up is much better in my opinion. Reform of how Irish is taught to bring it in Line with European Best Practice and then the posibility of it being made optional.

Bottle_of_Smoke

deise go deo wrote: »

Quick Fixes like 'Make it optional' and then leaving it to the same people who are responciple for the current system to sort it out is exactly the kind of poorly taught out FF type Bull that destroyed this country.

Your idea is critically flawed in that it assumes (rather oddly) that A) those responciple in the Dept of Education are activly against making Irish 'Student Friendly' now and that If Irish is made Optional they will suddenly become Pro-Active and want to make it 'Student Friendly'


This is not a very well taught out plan, and is not supported by any evidence. The Current set up is much better in my opinion. Reform of how Irish is taught to bring it in Line with European Best Practice and then the posibility of it being made optional.

Apologies. I phrased it rather badly.

What I would do is say "from 2015 on Irish be optional for leaving cert, to maintain student numbers you need to reform its teaching"

I don't think it is in anyway odd to assume they will not be pro-active about making it student friendly, they've failed to do for the entire history of the state.

So long as its compulsory I believe they will keep the literature aspect for everyone and not change it to be taught as a spoken language

deise go deo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Religion has nothing to do with this thread, please stop trying to include it.

I would be perfectly happy if A third language was introduced as a proper part of the Primary school curriculum. In my own we had French, This should be made a part of the whole primary school system. There are dificulties in that very few existing Primary school teachers have any french. But this could be over come by having French teachers that work between several schools giving classes on different days.(This was the system used in my old school and it worked well.)

Science presents more of a problem. When teaching, you have to keep within a students Zone of Potential learning. Much of what would be covered in a Science class in Secondary school would be well beyond that Zone. Teaching Boyles Law to primary School students would be counter productive. Of course there are aspects of basic that could and as part of Geography are are included in Primary school. But you have to acknolage the limitations of what can be done in terms of science at this level. Saying teach science coz its vital may sound good, but in reality before 5th or 6th class there is very little that can be done in this area.

With that said, there are things that could be taught in 5th and 6th to prepare pupils for going on to JC science, to expose them to the basic concepts etc

This is a topic for a different thread however.

Nationalistic, parochial governments once accepted that language revival and Catholic indoctrination should be the predominant functions of our educational system. This narrow, prescriptive model was challenged by the Language Freedom Movement of the 1960s—and it is now necessary to rethink again what objectives are prioritized in our educational system.

I dont see what relevance a defunct movement from the 60's has to this discussion, All tha political parties are clear on where they stand on the issue of the Irish language, as is the program for government.

There is clearly widespread support for the Irish language in the population, and all evidience shows that there is clear benefit to language learning.
I believe that Language learning should be at the core of our Education system. In my opinion, the European moddel of Mother toung +2 should be implemented.

The benefits of Bilingualism is well known, Irish is the best choice for a second language for Ireland in my opinion as it would allow not only Individual Bilingualism which would decay over time due to lack of oppertunities to use of the second language, but National Bi-lingualism where people could use both languages as part of their lives allowing both languages to be kept and passed on to the next generation.

The reason that Irish is the best choice for national Bi-lingualism is because the Building Blocks for a Bi-lingual Ireland with Irish as the second language already exist.
To change to a different second language would be costly and would not bring any additional benefit, and would be less practicle in the long run.

deise go deo

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Apologies. I phrased it rather badly.

What I would do is say "from 2015 on Irish be optional for leaving cert, to maintain student numbers you need to reform its teaching"

I don't think it is in anyway odd to assume they will not be pro-active about making it student friendly, they've failed to do for the entire history of the state.

So long as its compulsory I believe they will keep the literature aspect for everyone and not change it to be taught as a spoken language

They wont if the Government implement a policy of reform, the dept has no power to over rule government policy.

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

Ruairi Quinn of Labor is the new Minister for Education.


I think everyone agrees that Irish in the education system needs to be changed, Just maintaining the status quo is not a sustainable option.

Labor's position is that Irish should be kept as a Core subject for the LC. But what is Ruairi's position on this? Has he ever put forward an opinion on this issue?

What reforms do you expect there to be made to how Irish is taught over the comming months and years, and what reforms do you think should be made?

I have E-mailed Him on this question, When (if) he responds I will let you know what his position is.

Godge wrote: »

For an insight into Ruairi Quinn's views on education, remember he has been a member of the Oireachtas committee on education for the last few years and there are many debates in which he has raised this topic.

See this link for one such debate

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/EDJ/2011/01/13/00004.asp


Of particular interest is this comment:

"Deputy Ruairí Quinn: I wish to ask a specific question. It has been suggested elsewhere that 30% of time in the primary school teaching day or period is devoted to a combination of teaching Irish and faith formation. Is there much control from Marlborough Street in how that time can be reallocated or do the witnesses have a comment?"

From the tone of the rest of the debate, it appears that he is deeply concerned about the amount of time spent on Irish and religion in particular. Not too soon for someone to get exercised about this.

Of all the possible Labour ministers, I would suggest he is closest to the FG position on the abolition of compulsory Irish.

deise go deo wrote: »

Can people please stop using this thread as a platform for a rant about Irish.


Making Irish optional is not really an Issue, it will not happen before the curriculum is reformed, if it happens at all. This is layed out clearly in the program for government. Even FG were planning on doing it this way before Labor got Education.

This thread is to discuss those reforms. Please try to remember that.

Among other things the first post of this thread (see above) asks the question about Ruairi Quinn's position on compulsory Irish and whether he has put forward an opinion on the issue. This is something we would need to establish before having a debate on what reforms he might introduce.

Subsequently, I link to comments he made in the Dail about the over-teaching of Irish and religion in primary schools and extrapolate from that that he may have views more similar to FG on Irish than many of his Labour Party colleagues. A reasonable (but not exclusive) conclusion from
the evidence available in that link. Nobody has produced other evidence from Dail speeches or elsewhere that would contradict that view.

Other posters have subsequently debated the merits of the abolition of compulsory Irish presumably based on similar perceptions of the new Minister's views. What is wrong with that and why isn't it what this thread is about?

As to the subsequent questions as to reform, I expect the new Minister to cut the amount of time spent at primary level teaching Irish but also to reduce the prominence of Irish at second level, including the time spent teaching it up to Junior Cert level which is disproportionate to the time spent on other subjects. I also expect him to therefore support the abolition of compulsory Irish. At the same time I am no doubt sure that he will introduce the same type of reforms always suggested for Irish - more oral, more contemporary, less of the old-fashioned stuff - which we have heard many times.

If you read his thoughts on curriculum reform, he consistently talks about the disproportionate influence of fringe subjects such as religion and Irish at both levels.

SB-08

Excellent news from our new Education Minister!

Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn has said he will be establishing a forum to identify how schools can be transferred out of Catholic patronage as a matter of immediate priority.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0311/education.html

Sulmac

SB-08 wrote: »

Excellent news from our new Education Minister!



http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0311/education.html

Brilliant news, and long overdue. Hopefully it will apply to secondary schools as well as primary schools.

Ray Burkes Pension

The best way to learn a language is through the language. Irish should be taught conversationally through Irish. Kids would pick it up easily.

As for Religion. Its just a waste of teaching hours and should be taught in the home if parents are that way inclined.

Patrick47

alan85 wrote: »

I think it's a shame there are no free Irish classes in Dublin and major cities where one could go to learn Irish. I'm sure there are many parents out there that would like to be able to help their children with their Irish homework and don't have the resources. I'm sure there must be some correlation between child and parent and how the child performs in certain subjects.

áth mór!

AFAIK one was started up by someone late Janaury.

January 25th upstairs in Connolly Books, Dublin

Intermediate class - 6.15pm
Beginners class - 7.30pm
Contact: 087 2125068

Be good to see more of these around.

deise go deo

Godge wrote: »

Among other things the first post of this thread (see above) asks the question about Ruairi Quinn's position on compulsory Irish and whether he has put forward an opinion on the issue. This is something we would need to establish before having a debate on what reforms he might introduce.

Subsequently, I link to comments he made in the Dail about the over-teaching of Irish and religion in primary schools and extrapolate from that that he may have views more similar to FG on Irish than many of his Labour Party colleagues. A reasonable (but not exclusive) conclusion from
the evidence available in that link. Nobody has produced other evidence from Dail speeches or elsewhere that would contradict that view.

Other posters have subsequently debated the merits of the abolition of compulsory Irish presumably based on similar perceptions of the new Minister's views. What is wrong with that and why isn't it what this thread is about?

There is nothing wrong with that per sé, However the program for government is quite clear on the issue, Irish will not be made optional until after the curriculum is reformed.

The Issue of making Irish optional has been done to death several times already on this forum, I really dont want this thread to go down that route and given that it won't be on the cards for a few years at the least, then I am more interested in discussing curriculum reform which is on the cards.

If you read his thoughts on curriculum reform, he consistently talks about the disproportionate influence of fringe subjects such as religion and Irish at both levels.

I have been looking for some stuff on this, could you provide a link?

Bottle_of_Smoke

deise go deo wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with that per sé, However the program for government is quite clear on the issue, Irish will not be made optional until after the curriculum is reformed.

The Issue of making Irish optional has been done to death several times already on this forum, I really dont want this thread to go down that route and given that it won't be on the cards for a few years at the least, then I am more interested in discussing curriculum reform which is on the cards.

Its kind of hard to separate because I think making it optional will lead to it being more successful. As I am no longer in school this is really the main reason I want it made optional.

And to be fair you stated in the OP you want to see it remain a core subject which suggested it was up for discussion. You also didn't state your opinion in the OP on how it should be reformed....

CerebralCortex

Could care less what he does about Irish in comparison to the elephant in the room of the dominance of church run schools.

deise go deo

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Its kind of hard to separate because I think making it optional will lead to it being more successful. As I am no longer in school this is really the main reason I want it made optional.

And to be fair you stated in the OP you want to see it remain a core subject which suggested it was up for discussion. You also didn't state your opinion in the OP on how it should be reformed....

It is an issue, but a secondary one at best right now.

As for reform, I think that the teaching of Irish should be reformed in several ways.

The teaching of the subject in secondary should be restructured so as to be brought into line with European Best Practice for Second Language Learning contained within the Common European Framework. The Irish version of this already exists: TEG

Irish should be split into two subjects for the LC, one based on spoken Irish that would be a core subject for the LC, and a second Literature subject that would be optional for the LC.

In primary school, a second subject should be taught through the medium of Irish(Art or PE for example) This would ensure that Irish would not just be a subject to learn, but a meduim of learning(And fun if the second subject is Art or PE)

To adress the inconsistencies in the standard of Irish among teachers, New teachers should be taught trough the medium of Irish for part of their course in collage. For existing teachers, free summer gaelthacht courses should be made available.

Gaelscoileanna and Gaelcolasteanna should be provided where there is demand for them, as part of the upcoming census, people should be asked if they would like to send their kids to all Irish schools. In areas where there is enough demand for Gaelscouileanna they should be set up.


If these steps were taken, then the revival of the Irish language would recieve a major boost and the issue of making Irish optional for the LC could come to the fore and be debated reasonably.

Mark Hamill

deise go deo wrote: »

If these steps were taken, then the revival of the Irish language would recieve a major boost

Lets say it does get a boost? So what? In what way does that actually benefit anyone over, say, having a foreign language that is actually used reformed according to your suggestions?

deise go deo wrote: »

and the issue of making Irish optional for the LC could come to the fore and be debated reasonably.

People cant reasonably debate now? I've read the thread and I can't understand why you disagree with Bottle_of_Smoke's and others point about how making it optional should be part of the reform.

#15

SB-08 wrote: »

Excellent news from our new Education Minister!



http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0311/education.html

Great news. This needs to be sorted out asap.

deise go deo wrote: »

I have been looking for some stuff on this, could you provide a link?

The Irish curriculum has already been reformed at primary level, in 1999. Any revisions will be window-dressing. The oral and communicative approach is already a cornerstone of the primary curriculum.

Are you looking for a link to Quinn's views, or a link to the teaching time assigned to subjects each week?

Ncca.ie will have info on the above.

deise go deo

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Lets say it does get a boost? So what? In what way does that actually benefit anyone over, say, having a foreign language that is actually used reformed according to your suggestions?

Bilingualism is quite beneficial. Irish offers the best chance of creating a functionally bilingual country.

People cant reasonably debate now? I've read the thread and I can't understand why you disagree with Bottle_of_Smoke's and others point about how making it optional should be part of the reform.

I dident say it can't be reasonably debated now, I am saying it would then.

Making it optional before the curriculum is properly reformed would be very bad for the future of the language.

deise go deo

#15 wrote: »

The Irish curriculum has already been reformed at primary level, in 1999. Any revisions will be window-dressing. The oral and communicative approach is already a cornerstone of the primary curriculum.

I think teaching a second subject through Irish at primary level would be a very positive step. It would allow pupils to not only learn Irish as a subject but also use it functionally, without any impact on time spent learning other things.

The area where major reform is needed is second level.

Are you looking for a link to Quinn's views, or a link to the teaching time assigned to subjects each week?

Ncca.ie will have info on the above.

I am looking for a link to Quinns views.

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

.





I have been looking for some stuff on this, could you provide a link?

I provided a link earlier in this thread to the Oireachtas Committee on Education. I provided a quotation directly from Ruairi Quinn on the issue. If you read through the debates on that link - there are plenty - you will find out all you need to know about Ruairi Quinn's view.

deise go deo

Godge wrote: »

I provided a link earlier in this thread to the Oireachtas Committee on Education. I provided a quotation directly from Ruairi Quinn on the issue. If you read through the debates on that link - there are plenty - you will find out all you need to know about Ruairi Quinn's view.

I just had a read through that debate, besides the Quote you provided, he did not mention Irish again(Unless I missed something), He did mention that in light of poor literacy performance that the allocation should be reviewed, but it was on Religion and not Irish that he pushed the point strongly. I would say that on the basis of that debate, he is far more interested in downgrading the amount of time spent on Religion than Irish.

Can you provide a link to where he deals with Irish directly? As from reading the one you provided, I did not learn much at all about his opinion on Irish in the education system, though I did learn that he dosent like Religion being taught and is concerned about literacy.

Mark Hamill

deise go deo wrote: »

Bilingualism is quite beneficial.

I'd dispute the benefits, especially in terms of Irish:
Everyone in Ireland who speaks irish speaks english, so no loss of communicatablility. Over 60,000 people speak polish in ireland (not to mention the 38 million in Poland), that would be a better language purely in terms of communication.
Cultures can be translated. Appreciation of culture is subjective, not objective, people dont have to appreciate any books, or traditions, forcing it on them as kids doesn't work.
Peoples identity should be personal, it should not be used in a way that encourages segregation and bias ("I speak irish" becomes "I am Irish" becomes "I am better than those who aren't").
Tolerance of other cultures would be even higher if the second language learned was from another culture.
The benefits of the brain described in the link are pure conjecture, except for that about IQ, which is logically reversed (people are bilingual because they have high IQs, not the other way around).
Most of the job opportunities created by bilingualism in terms of Irish would be tautologies - jobs needed in order to teach irish to others or to support irish already there. Having a second foreign language will be better than irish, as it would increase jobs in or working with foreign markets.
The self esteem thing is just bollocks. Even if true, the self esteem created would be nationalistic, which is a bad kind (leads to racism).

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish offers the best chance of creating a functionally bilingual country.

Why? Whats stopping us from implementing the changes you suggested, but with other languages?

deise go deo wrote: »

I dident say it can't be reasonably debated now, I am saying it would then.

Making it optional before the curriculum is properly reformed would be very bad for the future of the language.

Why? And so what if it was? Why shouldn't we let the language die? As a country, hell, as a planet, we should be moving towards an internationally inclusive position, in which through greater intercommunication people get over their largely superficial differences. This is not helped by this sort of mental segregation, we are irish because we happen to be born in Ireland, not because some part of our dna says so and says that we have to learn a dead language.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

....moddel of Mother toung +2 .

The mother tongue of most people here is English, so that plus two major world languages would give people the skills they need to participate in the global economy.

Let's not forget the importance of writing and spelling skills, which are sadly declining among today's children.

In due deference to Irish among the majority English speaking community, a hour a month could be set aside for basic phrases and forming an understanding of the culture of Irish enthusiasts.

deise go deo

Why? Whats stopping us from implementing the changes you suggested, but with other languages?

Irish has the best chance for national Bilingualism as the Building Blocks for a Bilingual Ireland with Irish already exsist, The Legislation is in Place, Communities already Exist where Irish is the spoken Language, Government departments are already able to provide services through Irish, a large and growing movement where Irish is the language of Education is already in place, This dose not exist now for any other second language in Ireland, and trying to reverse the process to replace Irish with a different second language would be expencive, would meet with massive oppisition and would be pointless at the end of it all as it would confer no extra advantage.

Why? And so what if it was? Why shouldn't we let the language die? As a country, hell, as a planet, we should be moving towards an internationally inclusive position, in which through greater intercommunication people get over their largely superficial differences. This is not helped by this sort of mental segregation, we are irish because we happen to be born in Ireland, not because some part of our dna says so and says that we have to learn a dead language.

There is no support for letting the language die, People want Irish to be preserved and promoted.
I have to say your notion that inclusivness meaning dropping cultural differences is not something I would ever want to see happen, I support the European ideal of Unity through Diversity. Irish is part of Ireland's heritage and it is part of Europes heritage too, Europe has very clearly decided that cultural diversity is important and should be protected, This is reflected in their charter for Minority Languages and the obligation that places on member states to take stron action to protect and promote minority languages in their juristiction.

The protection of cultural diveristy dose not mean 'nationalistic segration' it means mutual respect for all of Europes Linguistic and cultural heritage.

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

I just had a read through that debate, besides the Quote you provided, he did not mention Irish again(Unless I missed something), He did mention that in light of poor literacy performance that the allocation should be reviewed, but it was on Religion and not Irish that he pushed the point strongly. I would say that on the basis of that debate, he is far more interested in downgrading the amount of time spent on Religion than Irish.

Can you provide a link to where he deals with Irish directly? As from reading the one you provided, I did not learn much at all about his opinion on Irish in the education system, though I did learn that he dosent like Religion being taught and is concerned about literacy.

I linked to one debate of many on the Oireachtas website. There are many debates on that website of that Education committee over a number of years and you can navigate to them yourself. From my reading of them, Quinn's views are consistent and he is unhappy about the amount of Irish and religion (does it matter which he is more unhappy about??) taught in schools. I could go through all the links and do your homework for you but I have provided one quote and a link to a site with many others. That is sufficient to support my argument that Quinn's personal views are closer to official FG policy than other Labour TDs. That is an important conclusion because of the post he holds.

All you have done in response is say he seems to be more worried about religion and more concerned about literacy but you seem to miss the point that the whole debate is about the PISA tests which focussed on literacy in the English language and Quinn is rightly worried that our children's English literacy standards are falling behind other English-speaking countries and that that will have an impact on employment. He seems to believe the focus on religion and Irish at primary level to be at the expense in particular of English, Science and Maths. He is not alone in that view. Many educators share that view.

If you want to disprove my point, the one I have backed up with quotations, find your own quotations of Quinn.

deise go deo

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

In due deference to Irish among the majority English speaking community, a hour a month could be set aside for basic phrases and forming an understanding of the culture of Irish enthusiasts.

Cyclopath please come back to reality, we know that this will never happen, to even try would be political suicide for any party. There is widespread support for the language. People want to see Irish preserved and promoted, not relegated to cultural relic.

Nodin

Sort of off topic, but considering its sort of a lingua fraca across a vast expanse of Europe, wouldn't it be an idea to add Russian to the curriculum?

Godge

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish has the best chance for national Bilingualism as the Building Blocks for a Bilingual Ireland with Irish already exsist, The Legislation is in Place, Communities already Exist where Irish is the spoken Language, Government departments are already able to provide services through Irish, a large and growing movement where Irish is the language of Education is already in place, This dose not exist now for any other second language in Ireland, and trying to reverse the process to replace Irish with a different second language would be expencive, would meet with massive oppisition and would be pointless at the end of it all as it would confer no extra advantage.




There is no support for letting the language die, People want Irish to be preserved and promoted.
I have to say your notion that inclusivness meaning dropping cultural differences is not something I would ever want to see happen, I support the European ideal of Unity through Diversity. Irish is part of Ireland's heritage and it is part of Europes heritage too, Europe has very clearly decided that cultural diversity is important and should be protected, This is reflected in their charter for Minority Languages and the obligation that places on member states to take stron action to protect and promote minority languages in their juristiction.

The protection of cultural diveristy dose not mean 'nationalistic segration' it means mutual respect for all of Europes Linguistic and cultural heritage.

(1) Chinese, Spanish, Russian and Arabic as second languages would provide many advantages over Irish. Just look at the trade statistics of regions of the world trading in Irish versus those trading in the other languages mentioned.

(2) Unity through diversty and the charter for minority languages are sops to the small-minded nationalists on the European mainland.

(3) "The protection of cultural diveristy dose not mean 'nationalistic segration' it means mutual respect for all of Europes Linguistic and cultural heritage" - OK, let them teach Irish in Valencia and Palermo as part of that respect while we learn Italian and Spanish.

(4) "There is no support for letting the language die, People want Irish to be preserved and promoted." Of course, they do. Just like people want their own local hospital but if something serious is wrong they check into the Blackrock clinic. Just like the people of Dingle wanted the Official Languages Act until they realised it changed the name of their town, no tourists could find it and they lost money. Ditto the Irish of the nineteenth century who gave up their language for cultural reasons. Expect the current generation of school children and their parents to ask in the next few years, why were we taught all that Irish and religion when it contributed nothing to getting a job in Australia or Canada?

deise go deo

Godge wrote: »

I linked to one debate of many on the Oireachtas website. There are many debates on that website of that Education committee over a number of years and you can navigate to them yourself. From my reading of them, Quinn's views are consistent and he is unhappy about the amount of Irish and religion (does it matter which he is more unhappy about??) taught in schools. I could go through all the links and do your homework for you but I have provided one quote and a link to a site with many others. That is sufficient to support my argument that Quinn's personal views are closer to official FG policy than other Labour TDs. That is an important conclusion because of the post he holds.

Yes it really dose matter which he is more unhappy with and thus which he is more likely to persue.

You provide a link to a debate with one vague reference from Quinn in relation to Irish, that is not enough to back up your argument, You claim that there are other references that he has made that support your conclusion, lets see some of them, I am not going to waste my time looking for evidence that supports your position when you already know where it is(Presumably) and could link it here for everyone to see.

All you have done in response is say he seems to be more worried about religion and more concerned about literacy but you seem to miss the point that the whole debate is about the PISA tests which focussed on literacy in the English language and Quinn is rightly worried that our children's English literacy standards are falling behind other English-speaking countries and that that will have an impact on employment. He seems to believe the focus on religion and Irish at primary level to be at the expense in particular of English, Science and Maths. He is not alone in that view. Many educators share that view.

Would it suprise you then to learn that evidence suggest that learning a second language is beneficial for the development of both the childs first language and their Maths ability?

Effect of Learning a Second Language on the Student’s First Language
[FONT=Georgia,Georgia][FONT=Georgia,Georgia]
For years one concern that has been frequently expressed when there is talk of students beginning the study of a second language, particularly at a young age, is that such an exercise may adversely impact the student’s acquisition of knowledge and skills in their first language.
The Edmonton Public School study referred to above has discovered that the results on provincial and district wide English Language Arts examinations are higher for students in bilingual programs. The difference is marginal at the grade three level, but by grade nine it is significant, demonstrating the first language skills have been enhanced, not hindered, by the second language program.
Some years ago quantifiable evidence was collected and proved immersion programs were helping students to achieve a high degree of second language proficiency without detrimentally affecting English language skills overall academic achievement. (Genesse, 1987)
A compilation of findings from a number of studies shows a strong correlation between students achievement and the number of hours spent learning a second language. Furthermore students who begin learning a second language in kindergarten or grade one perform better than those learning at grade four and much better than those who begin at grade seven (Halsall, 1998)
Halsall found that while English skills can lag behind in the early grades (1-3), the lags disappear by grade five. Over time, immersion was found to enhance the student’s skill with English, as well as contribute to the development of multilingual capability. Interestingly Halsall also found that once established immersion programs are, in reality, no more expensive to operate than regular programs. Another very thorough study showed that all second language programming serves to enhance reading skills, English vocabulary and communication skills (Albanese, 1987). The argument therefore that postulates learning a second language inhibits development of the first language is not only false, but research finds the very opposite true.

[/FONT][/FONT]

http://www.frenchforlife.ca/images/Impact%20of%20Second%20language%20on%20Intellectual%20Development.pdf

Furthermore, there is research (Webb bibliography) that shows that children who study a foreign language, even when this second language study takes time away from the study of mathematics, outperform (on standardized tests of mathematics) students who do not study a foreign language and have more mathematical instruction during the school day. Again, this research upholds the notion that learning a second language is an exercise in cognitive problem solving and that the effects of second language instruction are directly transferable to the area of mathematical skill development.

I won't comment in defence of Religion as I believe that time spent on that should be reduced to allow more time for subjects like Forighn languages and science to be learned, however the claim that learning Irish negativly impacts on either English or Maths I would strongly contest.

If you want to disprove my point, the one I have backed up with quotations, find your own quotations of Quinn.

The burden of proof is on you, you have not backed your self up with Quotations, you provided one quote that was its self quite vague.

You claim that he has made other comments that support your conclusion, all I am asking is that you link to some of them. Hardly unreasonable.

deise go deo

FÓN Project

Just stumbled across this, seams very interesting, this is the kind of progressive approach that should be roled out on a national basis.

Sand

Nodin wrote: »

Sort of off topic, but considering its sort of a lingua fraca across a vast expanse of Europe, wouldn't it be an idea to add Russian to the curriculum?

Russian would certainly be quite interesting, but its a national language, not an international one (and yes, Im sure theres some quasi vassal states or ethnic enclaves in places like the Baltic states ...).

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

.....Reality.....People want to see Irish preserved and promoted, not relegated to cultural relic.

The reality (which you ignore) is that almost all Irish people do not speak Irish and do not care enough to learn it. The reality is that some can barely spell in English let alone read and write in both Irish and English.

deise go deo wrote: »

FÓN ProjectJust stumbled across this, seams very interesting, this is the kind of progressive approach that should be roled out on a national basis.

Fanttastic! compulsory Irish lessons coupled with 24x7 monitoring....

Sleepy

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish has the best chance for national Bilingualism

Do you honestly believe that? Or does that opinion just fit in with your desire to make others learn the language because you have an attachment to it?

...the Building Blocks for a Bilingual Ireland with Irish already exsist, The Legislation is in Place

And wastes a fortune in the tokenistic, unnecessary translation of so many documents due to the previous government's attempt to buy the votes of those that share your view that it's okay to force your love of something on others...

Communities already Exist where Irish is the spoken Language

Entire countries exist where Spanish, German, Chinese, Norwegian, Italian, French, etc. are spoken with genuine fluency where one can be truly immersed in the language. They have the added benefit that the state doesn't have to pay these people grants or over-invest in public services in rural backwaters which don't have the populations necessary to sustain them. (I grew up in an area designated as Gaeltacht where a grand total of two families in the estate spoke a few words to the examiner once a year to get their grant...

Government departments are already able to provide services through Irish

Really? Most public servants I've met (and that would be a lot given my line of work) haven't more than a few words of Irish and all translations are handled by expensive external agencies.

a large and growing movement where Irish is the language of Education is already in place, This dose not exist now for any other second language in Ireland, and trying to reverse the process to replace Irish with a different second language would be expencive, would meet with massive oppisition and would be pointless at the end of it all as it would confer no extra advantage.

Providing sufficient resources to non-gaelscoils to deal with the higher levels of students without English as their first language due to immigrant parents and remove the incentives for sitting ones leaving cert in Irish and I think you'd find the trend reversing pretty quickly.

No extra advantage? An entire population fluent in a language of a major trading partner wouldn't give us a commercial advantage?!?

There is no support for letting the language die, People want Irish to be preserved and promoted.

Some people. Most don't care enough to put the effort into it which is why you have to force them to study the language.

I have to say your notion that inclusivness meaning dropping cultural differences is not something I would ever want to see happen, I support the European ideal of Unity through Diversity. Irish is part of Ireland's heritage and it is part of Europes heritage too, Europe has very clearly decided that cultural diversity is important and should be protected, This is reflected in their charter for Minority Languages and the obligation that places on member states to take stron action to protect and promote minority languages in their juristiction.

The protection of cultural diveristy dose not mean 'nationalistic segration' it means mutual respect for all of Europes Linguistic and cultural heritage.

And where's the mutual respect for those of us that would choose not to teach our children Irish? The mutual respect for others' children that would allow them to choose subjects that suit their talents to matriculate to college rather than being forced to do a subject that may not suit them?

This argument comes down to the same simple fact every time it's discussed on Boards (or in real life for that matter): there is no benefit to devoting so much time to teaching our children Irish that wouldn't be gained by teaching them a modern European language. Any modern languages would also have the added benefit of actually being useful to them in gaining employment in the global economy.

The only benefit to the compulsory teaching of Irish is the satisfaction it gives to some people to force their desires upon others.

Sleepy

deise go deo wrote: »

Would it suprise you then to learn that evidence suggest that learning a second language is beneficial for the development of both the childs first language and their Maths ability?

Yet again, bilingualism is great.

Bilingualism in modern, useful, languages is even better.

Dannyboy83

deise go deo wrote: »

Cyclopath please come back to reality, we know that this will never happen, to even try would be political suicide for any party.

That is not the reality.

The party who proposed the most progressive reform, Fine Gael, far from committing political suicide, nearly became the first majority government in 30 years.

There is widespread support for the language. People want to see Irish preserved and promoted, not relegated to cultural relic.

I want to see Irish preserved and promoted.
That doesn't mean I want it to be compulsory.
I want to see Irish preserved and promoted for those who wish to learn it.

And it's been a cultural relic since long before either of us were born.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

UsernameInUse

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I couldn't agree more.

Mark Hamill

deise go deo wrote: »

Irish has the best chance for national Bilingualism as the Building Blocks for a Bilingual Ireland with Irish already exsist, The Legislation is in Place, Communities already Exist where Irish is the spoken Language, Government departments are already able to provide services through Irish, a large and growing movement where Irish is the language of Education is already in place, This dose not exist now for any other second language in Ireland, and

Most of the building blocks can be changed with little or no issue. Government departments already translate into other languages besides english and irish, instead of paying someone to translate into irish, they can pay someone else to translate into some other langauge. The communinties represent another tautology of the language - we keep the language to support the communities, and the communities to support the language. Making irish optional will not force these communities to close, and if they are effected by a lack of people going to the ghaeltacht, then that would kind of burst your bubble of there being a large and growing movement for irish and a strong opposition to its removal.

deise go deo wrote: »

trying to reverse the process to replace Irish with a different second language would be expencive,

Investment is usually needed to improve things, although I dont see how expense would be an issue, government departments are already providing things through foreign languages (such as polish), so that wont be an issue. The only issue is changing the legislation and we need to change several pieces of legislation in other areas, so doing them all at once will reduce the cost.

deise go deo wrote: »

would meet with massive oppisition and

Going by what I'm getting here, it would that mindless semi racist nationalistic opposition, from, I'd expect a small but vocal minority. If a massive amount of people cared about irish, they would speak it to a far greater extent already, everyone does it in school.

deise go deo wrote: »

would be pointless at the end of it all as it would confer no extra advantage.

No extra advantage? Are you for real? Is there a single person on the planet who speaks irish but cant speak another language? How many jobs are there that actually use irish (not just have a token requirement) compared to jobs that actually use other languages such as french, spanish, chinese etc?

deise go deo wrote: »

There is no support for letting the language die, People want Irish to be preserved and promoted.

If this where true, then why are you so against making it optional?

deise go deo wrote: »

I have to say your notion that inclusiveness meaning dropping cultural differences is not something I would ever want to see happen, I support the European ideal of Unity through Diversity. Irish is part of Ireland's heritage and it is part of Europes heritage too, Europe has very clearly decided that cultural diversity is important and should be protected, This is reflected in their charter for Minority Languages and the obligation that places on member states to take stron action to protect and promote minority languages in their juristiction.

The protection of cultural diveristy dose not mean 'nationalistic segration' it means mutual respect for all of Europes Linguistic and cultural heritage.

Cultural differences are all superficial mental constructs devised to better create communities by giving definite, easy to see ways for people to label every one as either "one of us" and "one of them". They invariably create division and are something we should move away from. That your ancestors did something is no reason to keep doing it.

SB-08

NEW Education Minister Ruairi Quinn yesterday vowed to change the way things are done in the department he previously lambasted for being secretive and protective of the Catholic Church.

While in opposition, Mr Quinn suggested department officials could be "members of secret societies, such as the Knights of St Columbanus and Opus Dei, and have taken it upon themselves to protect the interests of these clerical orders".

He also described many department officials as either "Catholic right wing" or being "incompetent, lazy and destructive".

Read more
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/quinn-pledges-to-be-new-broom-as-education-chief-2576763.html

alan85

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Having lived in Spain where English is taught widely I can tell you that English(regarded as the Esparanto around the world) is relatively poorly spoken. Come in off the coasts and you'll find their English is as poor as our Irish. I think you're being a bit ambitious regards foreign language education. Some people simply don't have ability and some no interest. It shouldn't be a solution to our woes that we train our children to speak a foreign language so they can move abroad, be it closer. That's a ridiculous aim for our education system. May as well export them as babies. I can tell you short of long flight it's hard living anywhere outside of the island. Who's to say Germany will be their chosen land? Who's to say it will be booming in 15 years time? They can always learn a foreign language as adults with the basic skills from learning Irish. I think the framework is more essential than the language they learn.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

deise go deo

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Most of the building blocks can be changed with little or no issue.

You think so? Well lets take a closer look, To abandon the Irish language in the way you suggest would be open to a constitutional challenge as Irish is the first official language, This would require a referendum to remove Irish from the Constitution, I cant imagine any political party being dumb enough to alienate its support base by arguing in favor of removing Irish from the Constitution. Parties generally base their stance on what they think will benefit them. Polls on support for Irish show a massive 93% in favor of preserving and promoting Irish with only 7% willing to let Irish die.

If you think you could get a political party to support such a referendum, let alone actually win it, you are wildly delusional.


But lets keep going, remember that at every stage of the way there will be strong and energetic opposition from the Irish language movement. The Agóid Chuin on Valentines day would be nothing by comparision to the hornets nest this would stir up. To add to that, you would also have teachers unions and Civil service unions up in arms over it as it would be a direct threat to their members.

The European Union would also put pressure on the Government to cease and desist as doing what you propose would be counter to European Policy.


You would have massive opposition from all corners and very little support from anywhere. Show me the Political Party stupid enough to try that!

Lord TSC

New topic. Same arguements. Without meaning to sound like I'm trying to start something, did we really need another topic on the compulsory Irish debate when we already have one with nearly 3000 posts in it already? It's the same points being brought up, ignored and repeated in them both :S

The long and short is both sides have their views and while I'm all for debate, it's becoming increasingly obvious that neither side will ever change their opinions on this topic...

deise go deo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

New topic. Same arguements. Without meaning to sound like I'm trying to start something, did we really need another topic on the compulsory Irish debate when we already have one with nearly 3000 posts in it already? It's the same points being brought up, ignored and repeated in them both :S

The long and short is both sides have their views and while I'm all for debate, it's becoming increasingly obvious that neither side will ever change their opinions on this topic...

This thread was meant to be about reforms that will/should be made to the curriculum, it has since been dragged off topic by delusional notions of abandoning Irish by some posters.

cyclopath2001

deise go deo wrote: »

This thread was meant to be about reforms that will/should be made to the curriculum,

The most important reform would be to make learning Irish voluntary. Close attention then needs to be paid to declining standards of literacy, particularly spelling.

deise go deo wrote: »

delusional notions of abandoning Irish by some posters.

Put the Straw Man and the dodgy 93% statistics away, please!

Lord TSC

deise go deo wrote: »

This thread was meant to be about reforms that will/should be made to the curriculum, it has since been dragged off topic by delusional notions of abandoning Irish by some posters.

The compulsory/optional debate is key to any discussion on subject reforms, despite how you deny it constantly...

You even asked in post one...

Labor's position is that Irish should be kept as a Core subject for the LC. But what is Ruairi's position on this? Has he ever put forward an opinion on this issue?

There you go. You brought up the topic of if it should be core or not and asked people what a politician's viewpoint was on it. That was ALWAYS going to lead to another discussion on core/optional/compulsory/etc and you know that....