Why do we put children though school?

I'm not a massive fan of the educational system either. Children are different and learn at different rates. But all anyone is concerned about is grouping them by age, and nevermind their academic abilities. Spelling and grammar and an actual interest in maths is just left by the wayside.
Look to the T&L forum for opinions on how well children read and write when they hit secondary. As for maths, it should be taught as: here is a puzzle, let's look at ways of solving it. Not the imagination-withering by-rote "this is extremely difficult so be afraid of it" methods. And get rid of the damn calculators.

iguana

bluewolf wrote: »

Look to the T&L forum for opinions on how well children read and write when they hit secondary.

That thread is actually frightening. It's one of the few reasons I'm glad I'll be an older mother. In the last decade I've learned a lot about our education system and the few alternatives that do exist. I've worked out what education I do want for my children and I've budgeted for it, in terms of the school fees, the costs of housing close to the 2 primary schools I'm happy with and in having a way for my husband and/or I to spend as much quality time involved in their education as possible. I've formulated projects we will do as a family to encapsulate many subjects and see how maths, history, science etc interact. And worked out how they will be able to pursue a university education (if they want) if they choose to remain out of the school system at secondary level.

One of the most baffling things to me about the current system is how subjects are taught in isolation. Why is historical building and architecture on the junior cert history curriculum, while geometry is on the maths junior cert curriculum but neither are done in conjunction. Just imagine the deeper understanding of both subjects if children learning about the evolution of medieval and renaissance cathedral architecture were in the same class taught about the discovery of geometric equations, the improvements to mathematical ability in Europe after the abandonment of Roman numerals and how that meant that our buildings could become more ambitious. Then as a project, incorporating the art class, get groups of children to design period appropriate style buildings using mathematical formulae to prove it will stand. Then in art they can design and build models.

They have then learned maths and it's real world applications. History and the amazing differences made by travel, multiculturalism and political/religious feelings of the period. Had an opportunity to flex their creative muscles while practising teamwork. And that's just for starters, the same module could incorporate languages, horticulture, chemistry, geography and climate change, etc with a little imagination.

ClocksForward

Abi wrote: »

It's actually quite scary that some people don't seem to understand this.

Where did I say teaching Calculus and Poetry is wrong? I advocate teaching math and science until it comes out of their ears, not junk like CSPE which serves to stroke an agenda pusher.

Do you not understand the arguments put forward Secondary school should be an option, not a compulsion whereby the parent is basically forced to send their child there until they reach 16.

leonil7

.. id say put them to school so they become sociable and civilized which in turn creates a harmonious society, which i believe we strive to be. nowadays though they use the statement 'to be more competitive' which obviously ties up with 'expectations' and 'competition'. education in a sense has become quite like sports. everyone tries to become someone. and parents compare their own child with someone's own.

Sticky_Fingers

The abiding memory I have of secondary school was my second English class where the teacher point blank refused to accept our piss poor answers to the questions posed about a short story. She made us rewrite them so that they didn't sound like they were composed by a drunken retard.

Without fail every single student in the class initially wrote the standard two line explanation that was acceptable back in primary as to the motivation of a character. We couldn't believe that she wanted a whole bloody paragraph let alone the fact that she wanted us to use the terms alliteration or assonance in a coherent manner.

God bless her but she finally taught us good English

It was not until secondary that I knew anything of the wonder of science, it was in a first year science lab where I found my calling. Nothing, I repeat nothing was more insightful, eyeopening and wondrous then actually carrying out experiments in that lab. If I had missed out on that portion of my education I would be a very different, less well informed person right now.

Saying that I must admit to feeling that the standard of education given to kids today is severely lacking, I've been tutoring my nieces in certain subjects (science) and I've noticed a sharp decrease in both the content and standard expected of students then those expected back in my day.

30Min

iguana wrote: »

Then as a project, incorporating the art class, get groups of children to design period appropriate style buildings using mathematical formulae to prove it will stand. Then in art they can design and build models.

They have then learned maths and it's real world applications.

But you have to teach children the formulae before you ask them to apply them to the design of a building.

So lets say you incorporate a maths class with an architecture class. In the beginning, you are going to have to explain the basic concepts of each of these subjects to the class.

How can you expect a child to understand the application of a mathematical equation to architectural design straight off the bat ?

They would not be able to, therefore, even though you are 'incorporating' both of these subjects into one class, for a significant amount of time in the beginning, you are going to have to teach these subjects separately or as you mentioned in you post....in isolation.

That's what you do in school. If a child then decides to pursue a particular subject further, they have the fundamentals of the subject down, which they can then use in various applications.

I sounds to me that you are expecting kids to run before they can even crawl.

30Min

ClocksForward wrote: »

Where did I say teaching Calculus and Poetry is wrong?

Post 56

iguana

30Min wrote: »

They would not be able to, therefore, even though you are 'incorporating' both of these subjects into one class, for a significant amount of time in the beginning, you are going to have to teach these subjects separately or as you mentioned in you post....in isolation.

I'm talking about junior cert classes. Children aged 11-16 they have already done the basics in primary school. If they can't 'crawl' by secondary school, tbh, it's already pretty much game over for them.

Icyseanfitz

i completely failed my leaving cert mocks when i was in 6th year around 5 years ago, two months before the actual exams i up and left school to study at home by myself, ended up getting 375 points which i was very happy with, school was pretty much a big load of bs to me, as someone else pointed out the only thing i really learned from it is that there are far too many asshats in the world,

i have since tried two college courses and i just couldnt stand the layout of them, so much useless ****e they try to cram into you

amacachi

Jordy Elegant Above wrote: »

The problems with schools in Ireland is that there isn't actually any educating being done at all, apart from teaching kids that conformity and learning shit off is the only road to happiness. All the subjects are taught by rote, Yeats wasn't on the paper last year so he'll come up this year and all that jazz. More effort is spent on making sure that the uniforms are on par than seeing if the students understand what's being taught.

My brother in law is a university lecturer in NUIG and he's told me that in the last fifteen years, his first year students have become more and more stupid each year. They're able to retain information with study but they're totally incapable of independent thought and often make incredibly basic mistakes in the essays they hand up, like mispelling placenames and even their own names.

All schools teach is you need to learn this stuff to get a piece of paper with which you can get another piece of paper, with which you need a job. That's it.

Uniforms, getting in a perfectly straight line at the end of break and lunchtime, those are the main pillars of a proper education!
On the independent thought thing, school again plays a big part in ruining that. You're told one thing and it's made clear that that's it. Teachers don't like being corrected by 7-9 year olds and aren't afraid to say it to their parents :pac:

iguana wrote: »

Fuçk that's rough! I lost my love of science, especially astronomy which I was obsessed with, maths and history in school but to lose a love of reading? I can't imagine that. Did you get it back?

Probably too much for this thread to go into but myself and a couple of others were given a ton of extra work every day to shut us up. Meant we still had a ton of homework. At 3pm every day I didn't want to read again. I thought that I basically wasn't allowed to go ahead of where we were in a subject (again, teachers don't like that) so just had to wait. Most of the extra work we got was reading comprehension, I'd had enough of reading (stuff I didn't want to read) for 2-3 hours a day to not want to read again.
Gah it annoys me talking about this, so, so much wasted bloody time. I love reading again now, only thing that's holding it back is that I find it hard to do it for more than 40 minutes without getting really sleepy. :pac: Badly affects trying to study as well.

30Min

iguana wrote: »

I'm talking about junior cert classes. Children aged 11-16 they have already done the basics in primary school. If they can't 'crawl' by secondary school, tbh, it's already pretty much game over for them.

No, you do not cover mathematical equations which could be applied to architecture and design by 6th class....at age 11.


Its ridiculous to say that by the time you finish 6th class, if you don't have geometry, algebra etc studied and understood to the point that you can go off on your own and take over the world.....its game over.

By your argument, you could sit your Junior Cart at the end of 6th class.

stovelid

Jordy Elegant Above wrote: »

My brother in law is a university lecturer in NUIG and he's told me that in the last fifteen years, his first year students have become more and more stupid each year. They're able to retain information with study but they're totally incapable of independent thought and often make incredibly basic mistakes in the essays they hand up, like mispelling placenames and even their own names.
.

My friend is a lecturer in a well-known, supposedly top-drawer university and sends me lists of funny stuff he comes across in exam papers and essays from time to time. Some of the stuff is appalling and hilarious by turn.

I have no doubt that many people of so-called low education could contribute better ideas and opinions (approaching the cultural canon from a less compromised and fresher perspective) but have not got the so-called basics: grammar, rote-learning capability and an acknowledgement of the basic precepts of "culture" - basically the patina of middle-class "education" which in itself does not confer independent or interesting ideas. It's a patina that can get a completely mediocre student through college easily although admittedly it can help the right type of student formulate their ideas better.

That said, most students are barely out of childhood themselves when they enter university so maybe we're being unfair.

30Min

30Min wrote: »

No, you do not cover mathematical equations which could be applied to architecture and design by 6th class....at age 11.


Its ridiculous to say that by the time you finish 6th class, if you don't have geometry, algebra etc studied and understood to the point that you can go off on your own and take over the world.....its game over.

By your argument, you could sit your Junior Cart at the end of 6th class.

Why are you talking about 6th class? She clearly said after you've covered the basics in primary you can start tackling this

Chuck Stone

stovelid wrote: »

My friend is a lecturer in a well-known, supposedly top-drawer university and sends me lists of funny stuff he comes across in exam papers and essays from time to time. Some of the stuff is in turn appalling and hilarious.

Fella I know sends me nuggets of comedy gold, with the click of a button, that I can easily share with my peers on a popular web-community.

Share Sir.

stovelid

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Fella I know sends me nuggets of comedy gold, with the click of a button, that I can easily share with my peers on a popular web-community.

Share Sir.

Best not.

Although sorely tempted.

Adamantium

iguana wrote: »

That thread is actually frightening. It's one of the few reasons I'm glad I'll be an older mother. In the last decade I've learned a lot about our education system and the few alternatives that do exist. I've worked out what education I do want for my children and I've budgeted for it, in terms of the school fees, the costs of housing close to the 2 primary schools I'm happy with and in having a way for my husband and/or I to spend as much quality time involved in their education as possible. I've formulated projects we will do as a family to encapsulate many subjects and see how maths, history, science etc interact. And worked out how they will be able to pursue a university education (if they want) if they choose to remain out of the school system at secondary level.

One of the most baffling things to me about the current system is how subjects are taught in isolation. Why is historical building and architecture on the junior cert history curriculum, while geometry is on the maths junior cert curriculum but neither are done in conjunction. Just imagine the deeper understanding of both subjects if children learning about the evolution of medieval and renaissance cathedral architecture were in the same class taught about the discovery of geometric equations, the improvements to mathematical ability in Europe after the abandonment of Roman numerals and how that meant that our buildings could become more ambitious. Then as a project, incorporating the art class, get groups of children to design period appropriate style buildings using mathematical formulae to prove it will stand. Then in art they can design and build models.

They have then learned maths and it's real world applications. History and the amazing differences made by travel, multiculturalism and political/religious feelings of the period. Had an opportunity to flex their creative muscles while practising teamwork. And that's just for starters, the same module could incorporate languages, horticulture, chemistry, geography and climate change, etc with a little imagination.

You make too much sense, stop

Noodleworm

While I hated school myself, I do admit we need a standard of education. Id like to see a lot of it taught differently though.
Its been documented that staying in education longer raises your IQ, and we know we have a lot of lazy teens would simple never try to learn thing themselves.
Its hard, but I think it does people good in the long run to push themselves intellectually, and do learn to do work they may not necessarily enjoy.

30Min

bluewolf wrote: »

Why are you talking about 6th class? She clearly said after you've covered the basics in primary you can start tackling this

No, you need to read the posts.

She clearly said that she cant understand why kids at junior cert level ie first years are not taught (for example) maths through its use of formulae to design structures.

So on entering the junior cycle, kids would already need to have these mathematical concepts covered ie- on finishing 6th class or Primary school.

30Min

30Min wrote: »

No, you need to read the posts.

She clearly said that she cant understand why kids at junior cert level ie first years are not taught (for example) maths through its use of formulae to design structures.

So on entering the junior cycle, kids would already need to have these mathematical concepts covered ie- on finishing 6th class or Primary school.

Why is historical building and architecture on the junior cert history curriculum, while geometry is on the maths junior cert curriculum but neither are done in conjunction

30Min

iguana wrote: »

One of the most baffling things to me about the current system is how subjects are taught in isolation. Why is historical building and architecture on the junior cert history curriculum, while geometry is on the maths junior cert curriculum but neither are done in conjunction.

Here's the quote for you bluwolf. If you can't be arsed reading through the thread yourself.

What I'm saying is, you can't jump to this level without first teaching the basic concepts.....and you have to do this with each subject individually- or risk loosing the kids at the bottom of page one.

Iguana responded by telling me that these basics are covered in primary school.

30Min

30Min wrote: »

Here's the quote for you bluwolf. If you can't be arsed reading through the thread yourself.

why are you posting a quote i just quoted above you, and making snide remarks for no reason?
are you just not reading my posts or something?

30Min

bluewolf wrote: »

why are you posting a quote i just quoted above you, and making snide remarks for no reason?
are you just not reading my posts or something?

We were obviously writing our posts at the same time....and posted them at the same time.

I'm not making snide remarks no- It was just the timing of the posts.

[Rasta]

I feel sorry for anyone who compliments the education system, which obviously produces the finest quality children you can think of. From my experience 50% of teenagers are pretty much already alcoholics, generally unmotivated, no sense of the future (they don't give a rats ass about anything other than having the craic boiiis). There's no point even getting started on the scummers/knackers/scobes...

You can also tell how bad our education is, if no one in ireland truly cares about how much the government/bankers are taking advantage of us. They're a sack of no goodies, who fail at what they do and in return take all our money. I bet they're pissing themselves laughing at how ignorant and stupid the general public is.

Yes, these are sweeping generalisations, but there's no point sugar-coating the fact the Irish are uneducated idiots(with the rare exceptions of course..).

iguana

30Min wrote: »

No, you do not cover mathematical equations which could be applied to architecture and design by 6th class....at age 11.


Its ridiculous to say that by the time you finish 6th class, if you don't have geometry, algebra etc studied and understood to the point that you can go off on your own and take over the world.....its game over.

By your argument, you could sit your Junior Cart at the end of 6th class.

Yes you most certainly do. We did geometry in 4th, 5th and 6th classes. aged 9-12. It was part of the slow as walking through toffee sauce syllabus. You have the basics covered, certainly enough to expand upon at junior cert level to be able to learn to apply it to the basics of architectural design taught about in junior cert history.

Catari Jaguar

Just with regards Iguana's post there about integrating subjects. I totally agree. I teach at primary level and everything is integrated. All the SESE subjects overlap, linked to maths, linked to writing/reading. Tons of project work. Use of drama, art and music for literacy etc. Even doing PE as Gaeilge occcaionally. Loads of discovery learning and group/ pair work, active learning, hands-on, fun activities...

Then all these skills get lost at secondary school level. Children lose interest, they're taught for a test. No self assessment. Nothing to show but LC results if they make it that far. No motivation. No reward. Mind boggling.

amacachi

cherub rock wrote: »

Just with regards Iguana's post there about integrating subjects. I totally agree. I teach at primary level and everything is integrated. All the SESE subjects overlap, linked to maths, linked to writing/reading. Tons of project work. Use of drama, art and music for literacy etc. Even doing PE as Gaeilge occcaionally. Loads of discovery learning and group/ pair work, active learning, hands-on, fun activities...

One problem with that is that kids are fickle. Even when it's integrated there'll be some who shut off at the mention of art or maths or Irish or whatever. Makes the whole thing something of an exercise in futility. :pac:

oppenheimer1

ClocksForward wrote: »

Looking back over the years wasted in secondary education in this country, it got me thinkling..why does society feel the need to push children through this sweat shop of indoctrination in lieu of giving the little bastards a library card and a mentor?

I can't speak for anybody else, but I've had to unlearn most of the rubbish "taught" in school. Teach the kid the basics, then leave him to his own devices I say. Children who are going to make something of themselves are going to do it regardless.

We don't need this excuse of a system to be perpetuated at large. I say remove the need for these "teachers" to stroke their ego by teaching children garbage like "CSPE" or how to cook a ****ing slice of toast. If you want to learn calculus, there are no shortage of books. Secondary education has more in common with a circus act imo.

Autodidactism for all:)

If the value of education has to be explained to you, then it really was wasted on you.

30Min

iguana wrote: »

certainly enough to expand upon at junior cert level to be able to learn to apply it to the basics of architectural design taught about in junior cert history.

Yes, so you need to expand on the subjects at junior cert level- realistically- for the first year at least, before you get into your idea about

iguana wrote: »

the deeper understanding of both subjects if children learning about the evolution of medieval and renaissance cathedral architecture were in the same class taught about the discovery of geometric equations

And this is the simple reason, from which the need for subjects to be taught in isolation in the first instance arises.

Catari Jaguar

amacachi wrote: »

One problem with that is that kids are fickle. Even when it's integrated there'll be some who shut off at the mention of art or maths or Irish or whatever. Makes the whole thing something of an exercise in futility. :pac:

Half the time they don't even relise they're learning

Children are easily manipulated. Even the toughest inner city kids that fukn hate school can be taught through something that interests them and is at their level. Like a project about their area, or using football results to teach data in maths. Teachers just have to do more than the bare minimum and think outside the box...

ClocksForward

To this day I will never forget reading bull**** in CSPE while questioning everything the teacher said. One of the books announced that good citizens pay their tax and invest in the eurozone or something to that effect. I swear to god, pick up one of those textbooks if you don't believe me. Be a good little EU boy

No ****, this is opinionated propoganda masquerading as fact. These textbooks are written in such a manner as to influence learning. For example, the history textbooks focus far too much of the bloody text on Irish History. Why is this the case Not to mention twisting the wording at times and also deliberately misrepresenting certain facts to suit the agenda of the textbook authors.

If you can do one thing for your child, tell them to question everything they hear. Sure look at how CSPE improved the political knowledge situation, we now have a situation where we are all paying dough to faceless bastards we have never met while people are starving.

It's disgusting how limited the school system can be at times. Will never forget the day I entered into college after working for a few years and told alongside minted LC students who mostly dropped out that "spoonfeeding was over". That Lecturer was a hardass to the extreme, but there was alot of truth to what he said most of the time.

IvyTheTerrible

ClocksForward wrote: »

To this day I will never forget reading bull**** in CSPE while questioning everything the teacher said. One of the books announced that good citizens pay their tax and invest in the eurozone or something to that effect. I swear to god, pick up one of those textbooks if you don't believe me. Be a good little EU boy

No ****, this is opinionated propoganda masquerading as fact. These textbooks are written in such a manner as to influence learning. For example, the history textbooks focus nearly 50% of the bloody text on Irish History. Why is this the case

If you can do one thing for your child, tell them to question everything they hear. Sure look at how CSPE improved the political knowledge situation, we now have a situation where we are all paying dough to facecess bastards we have never met while people are starving.

It's disgusting how limited the school system can be at times. Will never forget the day I entered into college after working for a few years and told alongside minted LC students who mostly dropped out that "spoonfeeding was over". That Lecturer was a hardass to the extreme, but there was alot of truth to what he said most of the time.

In fairness, CPSE is just one subject. The stuff they teach you in Maths, Biology, Chemistry, can hardly be classified as propaganda.

iguana

30Min wrote: »

Yes, so you need to expand on the subjects at junior cert level- realistically- for the first year at least, before you get into your idea about



And this is the simple reason, from which the need for subjects to be taught in isolation in the first instance arises.

Serious question. Does the meaning of "taught in conjunction" completely escape your understanding? Because everything you have come out with implies that it does.

They are taught the maths at the same time as they are taught history, then they apply what they have learned in a project. They don't walk in the door of first year and get told to design a cathedral on their first day. They do the classes and then are asked to apply their learning so the teachers know whether they actually understand the module rather than are just able to regurgitate it. They also would not be expected to design perfect buildings right away it's school, not a 14th century building site. When they make mistakes the teachers can catch them and be aware of what they need to go over.

amacachi

cherub rock wrote: »

Half the time they don't even relise they're learning

For some, yes. The trouble is that if they take in 20% while others take it all in they're just further behind. They need more help while those who did pay attention to a specific part are left bored out of their heads.

Children are easily manipulated. Even the toughest inner city kids that fukn hate school can be taught through something that interests them and is at their level. Like a project about their area, or using football results to teach data in maths. Teachers just have to do more than the bare minimum and think outside the box...

Well this is where I disagree, how something as fundamental as understanding a football league table needs to be explained to a 6 year old is beyond me. :pac:

ClocksForward

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

In fairness, CPSE is just one subject. The stuff they teach you in Maths, Biology, Chemistry, can hardly be classified as propaganda.

Maths and English are absolutely essential.

Everything else, it becomes a far less clear issue. For example, we have Junior Cert students lugging around twice their weight in textbooks. Why not just condense the curriculum and cut out the BS subjects which are fine once optional, but it's more the case that these schools force children to learn subjects they have 0 interest in.

And before you tell me that they "should broaden their mind" this is only applicable if the teacher engages in a passionate manner. It's more common that the teachers simply read from the textbook verbatim and don't allow any class interaction. This is not education, a computer can do this. You don't need to pay people for this.

This is not conducive to educating our citizens properly. These people are the future of our nation, and we are doing a poor job in most cases of providing an environment which fosters intellectual curiosity, over learning off of entire essays for examinations:mad:

ClocksForward

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

If the value of education has to be explained to you, then it really was wasted on you.

I only question the secondary school Institution. If you think I don't value education, you don't understand the arguments I am putting forward to force people to reconsider if the system in it's current form is acceptable in the 21st century. We aren't living in Victorian times anymore, as much as some people would like that to be the case.

oppenheimer1

ClocksForward wrote: »

To this day I will never forget reading bull**** in CSPE while questioning everything the teacher said. One of the books announced that good citizens pay their tax and invest in the eurozone or something to that effect. I swear to god, pick up one of those textbooks if you don't believe me. Be a good little EU boy

No ****, this is opinionated propoganda masquerading as fact. These textbooks are written in such a manner as to influence learning. For example, the history textbooks focus far too much of the bloody text on Irish History. Why is this the case Not to mention twisting the wording at times and also deliberately misrepresenting certain facts to suit the agenda of the textbook authors.

If you can do one thing for your child, tell them to question everything they hear. Sure look at how CSPE improved the political knowledge situation, we now have a situation where we are all paying dough to faceless bastards we have never met while people are starving.

It's disgusting how limited the school system can be at times. Will never forget the day I entered into college after working for a few years and told alongside minted LC students who mostly dropped out that "spoonfeeding was over". That Lecturer was a hardass to the extreme, but there was alot of truth to what he said most of the time.

Your lecturer may have been a hardass but he didn't tell you how to spell a lot did he?

You cannot blame CSPE for the current economic situation. All it did really was explain how to be a good citizen, and yes that does involve paying your taxes. There was more on how our electoral system worked and a good explanation of PR-STV. There was nothing of the sort that you must invest in the eurozone to become a good citizen. If I remember correctly it was all about pride in your community and pride in your country.

Its hardly surprising that Irish history has a focus in Irish schools. It is to inform children of where their country came from and the sacrifices others made for it. This isn't a unique approach to history teaching. Take history schooling in England. Colonialism is presented there as being of a benefit to mankind. Only passing reference is made to the suffering inflicted on the natives.

By the way there should be no one starving in Ireland. If they are, it is of their own doing.

oppenheimer1

ClocksForward wrote: »

Maths and English are absolutely essential.

Everything else, it becomes a far less clear issue. For example, we have Junior Cert students lugging around twice their weight in textbooks. Why not just condense the curriculum and cut out the BS subjects which are fine once optional, but it's more the case that these schools force children to learn subjects they have 0 interest in.

And before you tell me that they "should broaden their mind" this is only applicable if the teacher engages in a passionate manner. It's more common that the teachers simply read from the textbook verbatim and don't allow any class interaction. This is not education, a computer can do this. You don't need to pay people for this.

This is not conducive to educating our citizens properly. These people are the future of our nation, and we are doing a poor job in most cases of providing an environment which fosters intellectual curiosity, over learning off of entire essays for examinations:mad:

How would a student know if they have no interest in a subject if they are not exposed to it?

As it stands there are only 4 compulsory subjects for the Junior cert. The curriculum is pretty condensed as it is, and removing further chunks from it would increase the "dumbing down" effect.

ClocksForward

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Your lecturer may have been a hardass but he didn't tell you how to spell a lot did he?

You cannot blame CSPE for the current economic situation. All it did really was explain how to be a good citizen, and yes that does involve paying your taxes. There was more on how our electoral system worked and a good explanation of PR-STV. There was nothing of the sort that you must invest in the eurozone to become a good citizen. If I remember correctly it was all about pride in your community and pride in your country.

Its hardly surprising that Irish history has a focus in Irish schools. It is to inform children of where their country came from and the sacrifices others made for it. This isn't a unique approach to history teaching. Take history schooling in England. Colonialism is presented there as being of a benefit to mankind. Only passing reference is made to the suffering inflicted on the natives.

By the way there should be no one starving in Ireland. If they are, it is of their own doing.

Dyslexia, look it up:) Take a look at those textbooks again. CSPE is taught in a biased manner. If it was taught properly, opinion would not be stated as fact. All the the crap I have posted is my opinion, it may or may not represent reality.

Shanotheslayer

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I Lol'd.

Just seen what I posted there! Rough night/morning heh

rainbowtrout

ClocksForward wrote: »

Maths and English are absolutely essential.

Everything else, it becomes a far less clear issue. For example, we have Junior Cert students lugging around twice their weight in textbooks. Why not just condense the curriculum and cut out the BS subjects which are fine once optional, but it's more the case that these schools force children to learn subjects they have 0 interest in.

And before you tell me that they "should broaden their mind" this is only applicable if the teacher engages in a passionate manner. It's more common that the teachers simply read from the textbook verbatim and don't allow any class interaction. This is not education, a computer can do this. You don't need to pay people for this.

This is not conducive to educating our citizens properly. These people are the future of our nation, and we are doing a poor job in most cases of providing an environment which fosters intellectual curiosity, over learning off of entire essays for examinations:mad:

What is the obsession with CSPE? You've complained about it in every single post and I wouldn't mind, but it's only compulsory to Junior Cert, there's no Leaving Cert equivalent. So little students watch the news now, or pick up a newspaper that despite your reservations about the subject, it's possibly the only place some of them will learn about how our country operates politically etc.

And as for other subjects being compulsory, maybe take a look at third level entry requirements and then look at compulsory subjects in secondary schools. Many schools make students do a foreign language until Junior Cert and many make it compulsory/or strongly advise that students keep on that language for Leaving Cert. Why? Because most of the courses in NUI colleges requires students to have a pass in a foreign language in the Leaving Cert whether it's relevant to their course of choice or not. Schools do not want to be the bad guy when Johnny or Mary comes banging on the door with their Leaving Cert results saying 'I got 500 points but NUIG won't accept me because I didn't do French. It's your fault for not telling me this in first year.'

Kodiakbear

I feel that besides the actual academic learning aspect, kids learn such important skills in the playground from other kids. How to interact resolve disputes make friends ect.. I have met home schooled kids many seem withdrawn in comparison.The social part of school is essential for life after.

My beef with schools is that they still have religious symbols on the walls and emphasis the teaching of it. Religion fecked so many generations of kids it should be kept separate from mainstream eduication.

ToddyDoody

We put kids through school to stop the most of them from reproducing too young / frequently.

Chuck Stone

The people who frighten me the most in threads such as these are the ones who say 'LOL kids go to school to learn maffs and spelluns' as if that were the only goal of education as we know it.

"Fish Don’t Know They’re in Water"

This quote comes from a post by Derek Sivers (which, in turn, comes from David Foster Wallace), although the origin appears to be from a joke where one fish asks another fish "how's the water?" The other fish replies, "what the hell is water?" The point: it's easy to forget that what surrounds you is only normal because it's what you know. To others, those surroundings might seem pretty strange.

Source

IrishEyes19

ClocksForward wrote: »

Looking back over the years wasted in secondary education in this country, it got me thinkling..why does society feel the need to push children through this sweat shop of indoctrination in lieu of giving the little bastards a library card and a mentor?

I can't speak for anybody else, but I've had to unlearn most of the rubbish "taught" in school. Teach the kid the basics, then leave him to his own devices I say. Children who are going to make something of themselves are going to do it regardless.

We don't need this excuse of a system to be perpetuated at large. I say remove the need for these "teachers" to stroke their ego by teaching children garbage like "CSPE" or how to cook a ****ing slice of toast. If you want to learn calculus, there are no shortage of books. Secondary education has more in common with a circus act imo.

Autodidactism for all:)

This post is so riddculous, school is much more than just a academic experience, its a social outlet for young people, to learn how to interact with other people, share, play, ect. As for "cooking toast" (didnt know you could do that :rolleyes:) subjects like Home Ec, and Cspe may seem riddiculous, but a young child who enjoys the subjects of politics or cooking in home ec therefore is taught in a system thats understandable and adaptable for a young person, and therefore when they make their first dish, or go on their first tour to the dail or something.....it means something to them. that self learning in a big way.

and thats just one of the points to be in favour for school. again...such a silly post.

IrishEyes19

Kodiakbear wrote: »

I feel that besides the actual academic learning aspect, kids learn such important skills in the playground from other kids. How to interact resolve disputes make friends ect.. I have met home schooled kids many seem withdrawn in comparison.The social part of school is essential for life after.

My beef with schools is that they still have religious symbols on the walls and emphasis the teaching of it. Religion fecked so many generations of kids it should be kept separate from mainstream eduication.

To be honest, I dont see a problem with having religion in school, obviously if children or their parents dont wish to partake in the classes that should definatley be an option, but hopefully what happened with religion in the past will be dealt with and perhaps it would be also wise to teach that history in the schools, in an appropriate way that explains what happened was terribly wrong. But as long as it is carried out properly religion should not be banned. A lot of people have issue with the church for good reasons but it should be remembered that it was actual people who messed up, not god and no one should have the right to stop a person from practicing their beliefs just because they feel different.

IrishEyes19

ClocksForward wrote: »

To this day I will never forget reading bull**** in CSPE while questioning everything the teacher said. One of the books announced that good citizens pay their tax and invest in the eurozone or something to that effect. I swear to god, pick up one of those textbooks if you don't believe me. Be a good little EU boy

No ****, this is opinionated propoganda masquerading as fact. These textbooks are written in such a manner as to influence learning. For example, the history textbooks focus far too much of the bloody text on Irish History. Why is this the case Not to mention twisting the wording at times and also deliberately misrepresenting certain facts to suit the agenda of the textbook authors.

If you can do one thing for your child, tell them to question everything they hear. Sure look at how CSPE improved the political knowledge situation, we now have a situation where we are all paying dough to faceless bastards we have never met while people are starving.

It's disgusting how limited the school system can be at times. Will never forget the day I entered into college after working for a few years and told alongside minted LC students who mostly dropped out that "spoonfeeding was over". That Lecturer was a hardass to the extreme, but there was alot of truth to what he said most of the time.

Sorry but I did history from 1st year secondary school right up to getting my degree in college with it, and although the secondary school exams on history were jam packed with info, the only issue I had with it was that it was far too broad. it doesnt only focus on Irish history by the way.

for junior cert, there is the Irish, medieval, roman, and european sections as far as I can remember and then for the leaving cert, theres Irish, european, and american and then your project. your post is totally off mark. Of course there is an emphasis on irish history. where exactly did you expect it to focus on. every country does this. plus the other sections are equally as important as in the exams there is equal marks for each area of choice you choose.

as for being biased and rewording, I never thought that. it gave both accounts of the major events just picking the civil war as an example here.

No offence intended but you sound bitter about something.
And I think actually the history course is being revised to make it less broad as there is so much to learn for the exam. But its so annoying to have people with this opinion writing this and turning people off, its such a wonderful subject to learn and thats why I continued it after school. Fair enough if students dont enjoy it in some cases, I never liked maths, but if anything, I hope the revision scheme makes history more practical and enjoyable for students as we have a rich history.

Acacia

ClocksForward wrote: »

We don't need this excuse of a system to be perpetuated at large. I say remove the need for these "teachers" to stroke their ego by teaching children garbage like "CSPE" or how to cook a ****ing slice of toast. If you want to learn calculus, there are no shortage of books. Secondary education has more in common with a circus act imo.

How is learning to cook for yourself ''garbage"? C.S.P.E. is basically impossible to fail but it at least gives some idea of how the governemnt/politics work, which surely isn't garbage either.

As for learning calculus from a book? I certainly couldn't have learnt a lot of secondary school maths just from having a book plonked in front of me, I'd have to have somebody explain it to me.

The only thing I'd change about secondary school is the pathetic excuse for Career Guidance that's on offer, which is usually 40 mins a week in Sixth Year of the 'guidance counsellor' explaining how to fill out CAO forms. Doesn't prepare you for the world of college at all, let alone the world of work.

Or maybe my school was just sh1t.