Why must Irish be compulsory??

Fuinseog

gerarda wrote: »

I haven't scanned every post but would this be the cause of young people losing interest in Irish? Up until the juniour cert I actually didn't mind it but then we were subjected to this:

Peig has not been on the curriculum since about 1996, definitely not this century. I have never read the book and have no intention of doing so either. oh wait you read it in English. what English novel were you subjected to? Jane Austen is hardly stirring stuff.

Fuinseog

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

What I mean is in school you have to ''learn'' Irish, despite the fact that I nor the majority of other students don't need nor want it. I didn't say ''take away my right to speak English or any other language'', I said that I'm unjustly being forced to another language that I don't see relevant to me - Irish.

In a sense though Maths and English have every right to be compulsory, whether we like it or not. Very few people (if any) would agree to get rid of Maths and English as compulsory subjects. They're essential. I don't like either of these subjects, but can understand that I will need both in my future working life, no matter what my job will be. Irish on the other hand, is forced on you unless you have a learning disability or are from a foreign country - and for what reason I've no idea. It's disgraceful, yes, to force Irish in particular on students who don't and will never need Irish. A waste of money and waste of both the student's and teacher's time. Not saying that people who would want to learn it be stripped of their right to learn it, but everyone else should be allowed to decide what language other than English they want to learn. It's not the government's LC after all - it's yours. Why should they care what languages you learn in school? They should have no right whatsoever to decide.

how is maths essential? you learn enough maths at primary level to see you through life. basic adding, subtracting , multiplying. how often does the average citizen use anything else from the field of maths.


as for English ditto. the way English is taught is a joke. very few kids understand anything of grammar and even adults in this country cannot distinguish between I have seen and I saw.

irish is part of our cultural hertitage or so those troublemakers in 1916 would argue. it suggests we are not just another part of the UK. if the rugby team sang amhran na bhfiann instead of some meek folksong they might actually win something.

rainbowtrout

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

Actually I'm pretty sure secondary students are legally required (unless being home schooled) to attend school until after the JC? Correct me if I'm wrong. Otherwise it's sanctions and fines against the parents of the student.

No, they are not. It's written into the constitution that the parent is the primary educator of the child. If a parent chooses not to send their child to school and home schools instead I think they get a visit from the Dept of Education to outline how they plan on doing that and after that it's up to them. It applies to primary and secondary.

There is a lad in first year in the school I teach in who was home schooled for all his primary school years, it was his decision to go to secondary school to see what it was like. It's a whole new experience for him.

Realistically most parents send their children to school out of convenience and the fact that they mightn't be able to provide home schooling themselves. That and our education and work system is geared towards those who have academic qualifications. How do you get to college? Leaving Cert. Harder to achieve that when educated outside the system. Knock on effect perhaps for job prospects etc.

GaryIrv93

Fuinseog wrote: »

how is maths essential? you learn enough maths at primary level to see you through life. basic adding, subtracting , multiplying. how often does the average citizen use anything else from the field of maths.


as for English ditto. the way English is taught is a joke. very few kids understand anything of grammar and even adults in this country cannot distinguish between I have seen and I saw.

irish is part of our cultural hertitage or so those troublemakers in 1916 would argue. it suggests we are not just another part of the UK. if the rugby team sang amhran na bhfiann instead of some meek folksong they might actually win something.

Depends on what job you go ito. Someone doing HL Maths in school might need it let's say for going into engineering, or a job which involves complex mathematics. If not, it could still turn out to be a handy skill, knowing HL Maths, or another example: A student doing honours maths would find a parent who also did honours maths really handy for homework help or grinds. :rolleyes:

I agree with the English argument - I see no point in the comparative part of it, although someone who wanted to study Literature might find the poetry handy enough, or someone who wanted to be an author... doing English has actually improved my essay writing skills. Wasn't great at it in primary school, but improved in it greatly doing in in secondary. Nice to be able to write a good story that classmates and teachers will enjoy. Seconday school english needs to be dumbed down a good bit though. More emphasis needs to be put on the basics, and less on the Shakespeare,

Cultural Heritage - what about the US, or Australia for example? They speak English as their primary language - they're not part of the UK.

WillieFlynn

laoch na mona wrote: »

its a vital part of our culture and the state is trying to preserve it

For good or bad, the Irish language isn't a big part of Irish peoples culture. If it was more people would use it outside of a educational setting, than Polish.

In dublin I notice more people using Irish Sign Lanuage, French, Spanish, Chinese, and many other languages, than I hear Irish.

Other Irish languages such as Irish Sign Languages, Cant / Gammon are just as much part of Irish culture, but yet are not even a subject (let alone compulsory) for the normal leaving cert*.


* ISL is an applied leaving cert subject.

rainbowtrout

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

Depends on what job you go ito. Someone doing HL Maths in school might need it let's say for going into engineering, or a job which involves complex mathematics. If not, it could still turn out to be a handy skill, knowing HL Maths, or another example: A student doing honours maths would find a parent who also did honours maths really handy for homework help or grinds. :rolleyes:

I agree with the English argument - I see no point in the comparative part of it, although someone who wanted to study Literature might find the poetry handy enough, or someone who wanted to be an author... doing English has actually improved my essay writing skills. Wasn't great at it in primary school, but improved in it greatly doing in in secondary. Nice to be able to write a good story that classmates and teachers will enjoy. Seconday school english needs to be dumbed down a good bit though. Most of it is pointless.

Cultural Heritage - what about the US, or Australia for example? They speak English as their primary language - they're not part of the UK.

Dumbed down? Literacy among students is bad enough as it is without dumbing it down further. I come across students every day who do not know the meaning of basic words.

A couple of years ago I had a couple of students in my LC class (not English) who liked to ask questions that had nothing to do with the subject to waste time. So in the end I used to say 'If the question isn't relevant to the class, don't ask'. It became a bit of a running joke, where a student would get in before I had opened my mouth to say quickly 'It's relevant..... and my question is.... '

One day a student put his hand up and said 'Miss, you keep saying our questions have to be relevant, what does relevant mean?' :eek::eek::eek:

And at least half the class chimed in with 'ya, what does relevant mean?' Couldn't believe I had a group of leaving certs sitting in front of me asking this question, and couldn't believe they had sat in front of me for months before they thought to ask. No, I'm definitely not in favour of dumbing down.


You mention English being handy for writing stories, it's also necessary for writing letters, reports, and all of your college assignments. And your college assignments are expected to be literate.

I teach Post Leaving Certs as well as second level and a compulsory module for all Post Leaving Cert courses is a module in communications. Some of the stuff taught on communications might seem fairly basic, because it includes things like writing reports, letters, essays, CVs etc, but the lack of ability in these areas is shocking. Students hand up letters and think nothing of not starting sentences with capital letters, grammar and spelling mistakes everywhere and generally poor sentence structure. I often don't point out the errors straight away but ask the student if they would be happy to send their letter to a customer and almost all of them say yes, and I wonder, because they've all seen letters addressed properly, using capital letters for names etc, and wonder how they think it's acceptable to write a letter in the same manner as they write a text message or a facebook status.


It's not unusual to be handed up a full letter without a single capital letter in it.

Canard

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Dumbed down? Literacy among students is bad enough as it is without dumbing it down further. I come across students every day who do not know the meaning of basic words.

Thats the problem though - I think what the poster meant was to dumb it down and teach those basics. Then again, I have to disagree because it's not the job of a LC English teacher to do that sort of thing. It's a primary school teacher's job or JC at most, but I know I'm not the only one who didn't need basic spelling, punctuation and grammar drilled into me so it could just be down to ignorance. It's around us every day and in letters etc as you said, its crazy how wrong people get the most basic things.

Namlub

It does reflect pretty badly on our education system that there are LC students who still haven't mastered basic grammar and spelling in English, but that doesn't mean the subject needs to be dumbed down to meet the standards of the lowest common denominator, especially at Higher Level.

randylonghorn

Namlub wrote: »

It does reflect pretty badly on our education system that there are LC students who still haven't mastered basic grammar and spelling in English, but that doesn't mean the subject needs to be dumbed down to meet the standards of the lowest common denominator, especially at Higher Level.

Bless you for not writing "grammer" ... but we may be straying slightly off-topic here!

GaryIrv93

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Dumbed down? Literacy among students is bad enough as it is without dumbing it down further. I come across students every day who do not know the meaning of basic words.

A couple of years ago I had a couple of students in my LC class (not English) who liked to ask questions that had nothing to do with the subject to waste time. So in the end I used to say 'If the question isn't relevant to the class, don't ask'. It became a bit of a running joke, where a student would get in before I had opened my mouth to say quickly 'It's relevant..... and my question is.... '

One day a student put his hand up and said 'Miss, you keep saying our questions have to be relevant, what does relevant mean?' :eek::eek::eek:

And at least half the class chimed in with 'ya, what does relevant mean?' Couldn't believe I had a group of leaving certs sitting in front of me asking this question, and couldn't believe they had sat in front of me for months before they thought to ask. No, I'm definitely not in favour of dumbing down.


You mention English being handy for writing stories, it's also necessary for writing letters, reports, and all of your college assignments. And your college assignments are expected to be literate.

I teach Post Leaving Certs as well as second level and a compulsory module for all Post Leaving Cert courses is a module in communications. Some of the stuff taught on communications might seem fairly basic, because it includes things like writing reports, letters, essays, CVs etc, but the lack of ability in these areas is shocking. Students hand up letters and think nothing of not starting sentences with capital letters, grammar and spelling mistakes everywhere and generally poor sentence structure. I often don't point out the errors straight away but ask the student if they would be happy to send their letter to a customer and almost all of them say yes, and I wonder, because they've all seen letters addressed properly, using capital letters for names etc, and wonder how they think it's acceptable to write a letter in the same manner as they write a text message or a facebook status.


It's not unusual to be handed up a full letter without a single capital letter in it.

Dumbed down as in less emphasis on Shakespeare, comparative, plays... - no-one's going to care whether or not you know about Shakespeare in your later life. More emphasis on the basic stuff, such as in spelling, grammar, structure, writing letters, reports, CVs, whatever else you want to put in. I don't think there was enough of that kind of stuff taught in English. That could affect future skills relevant to writing letters etc.

I'm in the LC at the moment, there's a good few who can't spell properly or just aren't bothered to put in capital letters, full stops... I've seen and heard teachers repeatedly inform them of these faults. Some just don't grasp it no matter what. One reason could be because they're just lazy/don't care, another one could be that they weren't taught enough of the basics, like spelling properly or including capital letters, etc. Because most of them would use phones or have Facebook, that might be a factor too - they could have been so used to using ''text language''. You might've just ended up teaching that kind of class however. You could get good classes, or you could get bad classes. Were many of them dyslexic or had learning difficulties?

jumpguy

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Dumbed down? Literacy among students is bad enough as it is without dumbing it down further. I come across students every day who do not know the meaning of basic words.

A couple of years ago I had a couple of students in my LC class (not English) who liked to ask questions that had nothing to do with the subject to waste time. So in the end I used to say 'If the question isn't relevant to the class, don't ask'. It became a bit of a running joke, where a student would get in before I had opened my mouth to say quickly 'It's relevant..... and my question is.... '

One day a student put his hand up and said 'Miss, you keep saying our questions have to be relevant, what does relevant mean?' :eek::eek::eek:

And at least half the class chimed in with 'ya, what does relevant mean?' Couldn't believe I had a group of leaving certs sitting in front of me asking this question, and couldn't believe they had sat in front of me for months before they thought to ask. No, I'm definitely not in favour of dumbing down.

Ahh, you sure they weren't taking the piss asking that? :P There's irony in asking a relevant question - the question being what does relevant mean.

rainbowtrout

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

Dumbed down as in less emphasis on Shakespeare, comparative, plays... - no-one's going to care whether or not you know about Shakespeare in your later life. More emphasis on the basic stuff, such as in spelling, grammar, structure, writing letters, reports, CVs, whatever else you want to put in. I don't think there was enough of that kind of stuff taught in English. That could affect future skills relevant to writing letters etc.

I'm in the LC at the moment, there's a good few who can't spell properly or just aren't bothered to put in capital letters, full stops... I've seen and heard teachers repeatedly inform them of these faults. Some just don't grasp it no matter what. One reason could be because they're just lazy/don't care, another one could be that they weren't taught enough of the basics, like spelling properly or including capital letters, etc. Because most of them would use phones or have Facebook, that might be a factor too - they could have been so used to using ''text language''. You might've just ended up teaching that kind of class however. You could get good classes, or you could get bad classes. Were many of them dyslexic or had learning difficulties?

I disagree. This stuff is taught in primary school, or at least it was when I was in primary school. After almost 13 years in the education system, it should not be the responsibility of the Leaving Cert English teacher to teach basic grammar and spelling. We should all be capable of that at the age of 17/18. This thread started out as 'Irish is a waste of time, it's rubbish, what's the point of learning Irish prose and poetry if we can't even speak the language, etc.' and to a certain extent I understand that. The vast majority of people never speak Irish in their daily lives outside Irish class. But they do speak English as their first language so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect students that are almost adults to have more than a basic grasp of the language by Leaving Cert.

That and something I mentioned earlier on in the thread, if a subject is dumbed down to the basics then students will learn less than the basics, because the majority of students take short cuts and only learn what is absolutely necessary to get them through. We wouldn't challenge any students if we didn't provide them with something a bit more stimulating than basic grammar and spelling exercises.

rainbowtrout

jumpguy wrote: »

Ahh, you sure they weren't taking the piss asking that? :P There's irony in asking a relevant question - the question being what does relevant mean.

No, I'm deadly serious. Just one of the many things I hear on a daily basis that I'm amazed by.

Other things I've heard this year include:

• 'Periwinkles are not real miss, you're making that up' (had to show them a photo on google images)
• 'Hedgehogs aren't real, they're mythical creatures. They are put on road signs to make drivers slow down' (I was particularly shocked by that one, every primary school in the country does nature studies of some sort)

• Not strictly educational, but was amazed to find that most of my fifth years had never heard of E.T, let alone seen the film. Now I know I'm getting old.
  
• A couple of years ago, when explaining to a bunch of LC Ag Science students how ewes are brought into heat by placing hormone soaked sponges into their vaginas for a fortnight before they are removed and left out with the ram, a student put his hand up and asked 'sure, how does the ewe go to the toilet with the sponge in her vagina for a fortnight?' Cue look of disbelief on my face as I explained that the vagina and urinary system were completely separate in females. Pretty much every lad in the class accused me of being a liar. Then they turned to the girls to see if I was telling the truth. Cue another picture on google images.

jumpguy

By "they" I meant the students! :P

I haven't seen E.T...

RadioClash

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

What I mean is in school you have to ''learn'' Irish, despite the fact that I nor the majority of other students don't need nor want it. I didn't say ''take away my right to speak English or any other language'', I said that I'm unjustly being forced to another language that I don't see relevant to me - Irish.

Unjust :rolleyes:. Perspective please. Once again, the world and curriculum planning doesn't revolve around your wants. Your 'needs' and 'wants' aren't what informs and guides policy, that's why you're in school. If every student followed their needs and wants, there would be xbox and keepy-uppy's on the Leaving.

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

In a sense though Maths and English have every right to be compulsory, whether we like it or not. Very few people (if any) would agree to get rid of Maths and English as compulsory subjects. They're essential. I don't like either of these subjects, but can understand that I will need both in my future working life, no matter what my job will be. Irish on the other hand, is forced on you unless you have a learning disability or are from a foreign country - and for what reason I've no idea. It's disgraceful, yes, to force Irish in particular on students who don't and will never need Irish. A waste of money and waste of both the student's and teacher's time. Not saying that people who would want to learn it be stripped of their right to learn it, but everyone else should be allowed to decide what language other than English they want to learn. It's not the government's LC after all - it's yours. Why should they care what languages you learn in school? They should have no right whatsoever to decide.

You don't need it because you've decided you won't need it, stomping your feet at a modest compulsion. One could say the same thing for any of the compulsory subjects. I can't remember using any of the mathematical formula I learned in school after LC, does this mean it was useless? Should I have taken a march to the Dail? Shakespeare?? What was going on there, he's dead ages and no one talks like that, USELESS! A language other than Irish to matriculate to Uni??? Absurd! I don't WANT to live in France, That's USELESS! Six subjects on the Leaving?? USELESS! I only WANT to do three of these. You get my drift?

Oh, and 'they' have every right to decide, and you have next to none. What with 'they' being the government and all.

GaryIrv93

+ these are just opinions on the matter, Bit of arguing going on as well,

randylonghorn

rainbowtrout wrote: »

A couple of years ago, when explaining to a bunch of LC Ag Science students how ewes are brought into heat by placing hormone soaked sponges into their vaginas for a fortnight before they are removed and left out with the ram, a student put his hand up and asked 'sure, how does the ewe go to the toilet with the sponge in her vagina for a fortnight?' Cue look of disbelief on my face as I explained that the vagina and urinary system were completely separate in females. Pretty much every lad in the class accused me of being a liar. Then they turned to the girls to see if I was telling the truth.

Annnd another major lack in our educational system right there ... basic sex ed. And yes, the parents should be be doing it, but half the time they don't because they're too embarrassed (this being uptight Ireland!) and/or they presume that "sure, they get it all on the internet these days!"

Well, teenage lads in particular do tend to pick up things from the internet, sure enough ... but given the type of source material, it's often lacking in certain details, engenders some unrealistic impressions of what they should expect from an inexperienced girl their own age, and indeed can spark off an inferiority complex!!

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Cue another picture on google images.

I'm guessing you mean diagram, but don't spoil it ... the clip currently playing in my brain is frigging hilarious!! :pac:

DepoProvera

RadioClash wrote: »

You don't need it because you've decided you won't need it, stomping your feet at a modest compulsion. One could say the same thing for any of the compulsory subjects. I can't remember using any of the mathematical formula I learned in school after LC, does this mean it was useless? Should I have taken a march to the Dail? Shakespeare?? What was going on there, he's dead ages and no one talks like that, USELESS! A language other than Irish to matriculate to Uni??? Absurd! I don't WANT to live in France, That's USELESS! Six subjects on the Leaving?? USELESS! I only WANT to do three of these. You get my drift?

I know you're being facetious, but your points are invalid. We all agree that any type of learning is beneficial, and of course learning Irish is also, but should we not direct our finite resources towards something that will actually have some further use? Maths makes up the basis of much of the world around us; appreciation and analysis of literature develops and expands the mind(ughh I sound like an advert); Spanish and French are spoken all over the world.

Irish? Well, there are libraries full of rich Irish literature! Oh wait... There aren't any. Well at least I can watch my Irish channels now! Oh wait... TG4 is showing some leathery, old man painting again or dubbing some American cartoon. At least I can finally talk to my grandparents in Irish! Oh wait they died years ago, as the language should have done too.

Just let those who want to study it, do so.

RadioClash wrote: »

Oh, and 'they' have every right to decide, and you have next to none. What with 'they' being the government and all.

That's a rather scary attitude to have. 'They' are meant to reflect and act upon society's will and needs, not perpetuate some forced learning of an archaic, useless language.

Seems to be a lot of the 'silly young people, still complaining about having to a bit of learning' type attitude. Nope, Irish is just objectively not of any use. (I'm exempt anyways booyah)

WillieFlynn

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

I'm in the LC at the moment, there's a good few who can't spell properly or just aren't bothered to put in capital letters, full stops... I've seen and heard teachers repeatedly inform them of these faults. Some just don't grasp it no matter what. One reason could be because they're just lazy/don't care, another one could be that they weren't taught enough of the basics, like spelling properly or including capital letters, etc.
.......
Were many of them dyslexic or had learning difficulties?

My mother said that I was fine at learning English spellings, until written Irish was introduced (possibly too early).

I can say from experience in school it wasn't a matter of being lazy or not caring, I found it very frustrating not being able to spell consistently, no matter how hard I tried.

Also English is a much harder language learn the spellings of when compared to Spanish, which is more phonetic and has less exceptions and irregular spellings.

Anyway just as well computers have spell checkers........

RadioClash

We all agree that any type of learning is beneficial, and of course learning Irish is also.

Contradiction alert...

not perpetuate some forced learning of an archaic, useless language.

Contradiction 2.0....

Seems to be a lot of the 'silly young people, still complaining about having to a bit of learning' type attitude. Nope, Irish is just objectively not of any use. (I'm exempt anyways booyah)

Make thy mind up.

Peanut

RadioClash, you make some good points, but suggesting that compulsory status be maintained because "that's just the way it is" is a non-argument.

This reasoning could be used to justify any old rubbish curriculum the state dreams up.

And denigrating students for wanting to "play xboxes" if they had their way?

I'm not sure where to begin with that. Why not remove all choice from second-level if that's how you feel about it.

DepoProvera

RadioClash wrote: »

Contradiction alert...



Contradiction 2.0....


Make thy mind up.

I said obviously the learning of Irish is beneficial, as is any learning. But nice try I guess?

spurious

Sometimes I think the overloaded primary curriculum has a lot to answer for. Yes it's great that kids start science in primary and do nature studies and cool things, but the second level syllabi presume a certain level of competence on entry.

Second-level teachers should not have to be teaching basic reading and spelling and addition and multiplication etc.. The unfortunate Irish teachers should not have to be doing basic stuff with their classes.

In second level we are supposed to be building on basics and guiding towards independent learning, but what is happening is an overal lowering of standards because classes up to JC are neither one thing nor the other.

The syllabi presume teachers in second level have literate, numerate students in front of them, but in many cases this is not the case. Independent learning and any aspiration in that direction goes out the window and notes get shovelled out. Learn that and give me it back.

RadioClash

DepoProvera wrote: »

I said obviously the learning of Irish is beneficial, as is any learning. But nice try I guess?

You're going round in circles. You say it's a beneficial pursuit, then say it's objectively useless.

I'm doing my best not to be patronizing when I say you need to learn the difference between subjective and objective.

DepoProvera

RadioClash wrote: »

You're going round in circles. You say it's a beneficial pursuit, then say it's objectively useless.

I'm doing my best not to be patronizing when I say you need to learn the difference between subjective and objective.

Sigh... I'm saying that while any learning is automatically beneficial, in the case of Irish you're lumped with something that has no application and efforts would be better directed at other things. How are you not getting this?

GaryIrv93

It's a lot like countries who conscript young men into the army - most of the forcefully conscipted soldiers are usually very miserable in the army and so usually aren't bothered when they're sent off to war - it was all against their will, they didn't ask to be there. Take the Gulf War for example, Iraqi soldiers (mostly conscipts) were surrendering themselves left, right and centre just for the sake of getting out and getting home.

School itself is another example - it's compulsory - it's forced on kids. An obvious reason why so many millions of kids hate school, even though it's for their own benefit...

Irish is the same - kids and kids only are forced to learn it against their will and most resent this, turning them against the language just like the conscipted soldiers did against the army. They can't wait to get out of school and one big reason is because they won't ever have to learn or speak Irish again. Nobody can blame them for this: they didn't ask to have it forced down their throats. If somethings forced on you, no matter what it is - then you learn to resent it. It's a simple part of human nature.

rainbowtrout

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

It's a lot like countries who conscript young men into the army - most of the forcefully conscipted soldiers are usually very miserable in the army and so usually aren't bothered when they're sent off to war - it was all against their will, they didn't ask to be there. Take the Gulf War for example, Iraqi soldiers (mostly conscipts) were surrendering themselves left, right and centre just for the sake of getting out and getting home.

School itself is another example - it's compulsory - it's forced on kids. An obvious reason why so many millions of kids hate school, even though it's for their own benefit...

Irish is the same - kids and kids only are forced to learn it against their will and most resent this, turning them against the language just like the conscipted soldiers did against the army. They can't wait to get out of school and one big reason is because they won't ever have to learn or speak Irish again. Nobody can blame them for this: they didn't ask to have it forced down their throats. If somethings forced on you, no matter what it is - then you learn to resent it. It's a simple part of human nature.

It's not compulsory, parents have a choice to home school, but probably out of convenience they choose to send their children to school. However we've had free education so long that students don't actually value what is being provided to them. Visit a developing country and see what parents go through to give their child a chance at an education, an education that will give them a chance of a better life. We've had it so long that some people seem to have forgotten what it can give them.

If education is forced upon us, why are so many students worried about their Leaving Cert grades and going to college, it's not like anyone is forcing them to go?

GaryIrv93

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's not compulsory, parents have a choice to home school, but probably out of convenience they choose to send their children to school. However we've had free education so long that students don't actually value what is being provided to them. Visit a developing country and see what parents go through to give their child a chance at an education, an education that will give them a chance of a better life. We've had it so long that some people seem to have forgotten what it can give them.

If education is forced upon us, why are so many students worried about their Leaving Cert grades and going to college, it's not like anyone is forcing them to go?

The same would be true in developing countries. At first, if education was introduced and free, etc the kids would at first be delighted, grateful and feel like they were in heaven. Eventually though, after years of compulsory schooling their attitudes might change to where they dislike spending their childhood in school, having homework, exams, being told what to do by teachers, parents etc and then start to see school as a chore rather than an education. Once they realise that they're not given a choice to go or not then they'd start to resent it. Many more young people love college rather than school - because no one forces them to go and they have the freedom to pursue their own interests without anyone else disctating everything they learn.

Obviously because the economy's in a bad state, and the recession won't end anytime soon. Very few places will hire students without an LC. No one's forcing us to go, yes, but without an LC, your chances on getting hired anywhere in Ireland or abroad will be miniscule compared to those with an LC. Parents are also putting a lot of pressure on their kids to do the LC.

SureYWouldntYa

Wouldnt ya just love someone with a bit of effin sense become Taoiseach. Get rid of Irish as a compulsory subject, and reform the whole curriculum. As well as most of the education system. Focus should be the student, Irish will be of no use to me except in pub quizzes. Focus should be on the Business' and the Sciences. The addition of Politics and Computer Science as well. Heritage? The "great" Michael Collins was'nt even fluent in it, like Del Boy at French. When will a bit of common sense come to this potentially great country

rainbowtrout

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

The same would be true in developing countries. At first, if education was introduced and free, etc the kids would at first be delighted, grateful and feel like they were in heaven. Eventually though, after years of compulsory schooling their attitudes might change to where they dislike spending their childhood in school, having homework, exams, being told what to do by teachers, parents etc and then start to see school as a chore rather than an education. Once they realise that they're not given a choice to go or not then they'd start to resent it. Many more young people love college rather than school - because no one forces them to go and they have the freedom to pursue their own interests without anyone else disctating everything they learn.

Obviously because the economy's in a bad state, and the recession won't end anytime soon. Very few places will hire students without an LC. No one's forcing us to go, yes, but without an LC, your chances on getting hired anywhere in Ireland or abroad will be miniscule compared to those with an LC. Parents are also putting a lot of pressure on their kids to do the LC.

Not so. There are plenty of countries, particularly in Asia where students who have the option of attending school do not have this attitude towards it and take their education very seriously. China comes to mind.

We are fairly unique in that we have all this free education, and we speak English, probably the No. 1 language for conducting business with other countries, not to mind the language spoken in America, yet we have developed a fairly blasé attitude towards education.

Free third level education only came in 16 years ago when I was starting college, it was a whole different ball game back then. There are plenty of people in colleges around the country who are not there for the love of education, they are there just to pass the time.

GaryIrv93

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

Wouldnt ya just love someone with a bit of effin sense become Taoiseach. Get rid of Irish as a compulsory subject, and reform the whole curriculum. As well as most of the education system. Focus should be the student, Irish will be of no use to me except in pub quizzes. Focus should be on the Business' and the Sciences. The addition of Politics and Computer Science as well. Heritage? The "great" Michael Collins was'nt even fluent in it, like Del Boy at French. When will a bit of common sense come to this potentially great country

+1. Although Enda Kenny did at least propose to abolish Irish as a compulsory subject for the LC, so at least maybe we've started being led by people with common sense... it'll be a long time however before the education system is entirely reformed.

SureYWouldntYa

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Not so. There are plenty of countries, particularly in Asia where students who have the option of attending school do not have this attitude towards it and take their education very seriously. China comes to mind.

We are fairly unique in that we have all this free education, and we speak English, probably the No. 1 language for conducting business with other countries, not to mind the language spoken in America, yet we have developed a fairly blasé attitude towards education.

Free third level education only came in 16 years ago when I was starting college, it was a whole different ball game back then. There are plenty of people in colleges around the country who are not there for the love of education, they are there just to pass the time.

And people wonder where all these smart asians came from.

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

+1. Although Enda Kenny did at least propose to abolish Irish as a compulsory subject for the LC, so at least maybe we've started being led by people with common sense... it'll be a long time however before the education system is entirely reformed.

He's a gob****e. You should add a poll to this and see what comes out. So much of whats taught in schools is a waste of time, teachers dont want to do it and neither students

Viken

Two things have turned me off Irish as both a subject and language:

-The secondary level curriculum. From prós to obscure reading comprehensions to horrible poetry...I honestly can't think of a single aspect of the course that I enjoy. For some exam questions, large chunks of the marks are awarded towards grammar, when 1. We're hardly taught any English grammar, nevermind Irish grammar and 2. For 90% of people the grammar is guesswork and instinct, we're not led to understand half of it. My list of pet peeves goes on.

-A rubbishy primary school ground-work in Irish that has left me lagging behind constantly at secondary level.

Throughout secondary school, I've been completely turned off the language that forms a core part of what used to be Irish culture. As opposed to English, which arouses me greatly That said, the two times I was lucky enough to go to the Gaelteacht I really started to "get into" the language, and hopefully I'll have better experiences of it in the future.

GaryIrv93

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

And people wonder where all these smart asians came from.

He's a gob****e. You should add a poll to this and see what comes out. So much of whats taught in schools is a waste of time, teachers dont want to do it and neither students

Maybe he is (not that I'm into politics at all) but he at least he actually thought to adress the problem with compulsory Irish unlike any other Taoiseach.

GaryIrv93

Viken wrote: »

Two things have turned me off Irish as both a subject and language:

-The secondary level curriculum. From prós to obscure reading comprehensions to horrible poetry...I honestly can't think of a single aspect of the course that I enjoy. For some exam questions, large chunks of the marks are awarded towards grammar, when 1. We're hardly taught any English grammar, nevermind Irish grammar and 2. For 90% of people the grammar is guesswork and instinct, we're not led to understand half of it. My list of pet peeves goes on.

-A rubbishy primary school ground-work in Irish that has left me lagging behind constantly at secondary level.

Throughout secondary school, I've been completely turned off the language that forms a core part of what used to be Irish culture. As opposed to English, which arouses me greatly That said, the two times I was lucky enough to go to the Gaelteacht I really started to "get into" the language, and hopefully I'll have better experiences of it in the future.

My principal mentioned once that he despised Irish during his school years, and was delighted to get away from it after leaving school. Then he said one of his mate's family lived in a Gaelthacht are and spoke mostly only Irish - after a visit to the family he loved Irish and is now completely fluent in it. The family taught him how to properly speak Irish in 3 weeks far better than a well funded school could in 14 years. Imagine,

RadioClash

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

It's a lot like countries who conscript young men into the army - most of the forcefully conscipted soldiers are usually very miserable in the army and so usually aren't bothered when they're sent off to war - it was all against their will, they didn't ask to be there. Take the Gulf War for example, Iraqi soldiers (mostly conscipts) were surrendering themselves left, right and centre just for the sake of getting out and getting home.

School itself is another example - it's compulsory - it's forced on kids. An obvious reason why so many millions of kids hate school, even though it's for their own benefit...

Irish is the same - kids and kids only are forced to learn it against their will and most resent this, turning them against the language just like the conscipted soldiers did against the army. They can't wait to get out of school and one big reason is because they won't ever have to learn or speak Irish again. Nobody can blame them for this: they didn't ask to have it forced down their throats. If somethings forced on you, no matter what it is - then you learn to resent it. It's a simple part of human nature.

Holy hyperbole Batman! Did he just compare having to learn Irish to army conscription??

Someone made reference to East Asian cultural attitudes to education, which is very salient point, as contemporary Irish attitudes to education sometimes stinks. Certain Asian countries (South Korea for example) have a remarkable attitude to education. Teachers are regarded as nation builders and students wouldn't dare flake off to the extent that some would in Ireland as they know what they owe to their parents and a system that provides them an opportunity to learn. This even holds true for what are ostensibly 'useless' subjects such as philosophy and defunct Chinese characters.

And after all this all able bodied males then must do national service. But do you know what, they don't resent it, they resent those who weasel out of it.

In short, in certain societies there is a premium on common good, duty to your parents and the system that was good enough to put learning opportunities in front of you, and last but not least to yourself to do the best with whatever challenges are put in front of you. It's not a perfect system but it beats the hell out of students thinking that the Government owes them a tailor made education.

So the answer to the conundrum you pose is no, it's not human nature, it's cultural, and you're propagating a negative and self defeating philosophy on education. And this go's beyond even the argument on compulsory Irish. I think your notions as to why and how you learn, and what's 'useful' to you are distorted.

A. By your subjective analysis whether Irish is useless or not (learning any language presented to you to the best of your ability is extremely good for further language acquisition, leaving aside all cultural arguements)

and

B. The sophistry that the Department of Education should put in place a system where students on a whinge can choose what's good for them and what's not, ignoring the broad remit they have for tens of thousands of students.

RadioClash

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

My principal mentioned once that he despised Irish during his school years, and was delighted to get away from it after leaving school. Then he said one of his mate's family lived in a Gaelthacht are and spoke mostly only Irish - after a visit to the family he loved Irish and is now completely fluent in it. The family taught him how to properly speak Irish in 3 weeks far better than a well funded school could in 14 years. Imagine,

So your headmaster had a poor attitude to Irish, he grew up and ditched the attitude and now loves the language. Fancy that. May I suggest there was a point to his story and it flew over your head?

RadioClash

DepoProvera wrote: »

Sigh... I'm saying that while any learning is automatically beneficial, in the case of Irish you're lumped with something that has no application and efforts would be better directed at other things. How are you not getting this?

I get it just fine. Saying Irish is useless and has no application is s-u-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e

not o-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e.

partyatmygaff

RadioClash wrote: »

I get it just fine. Saying Irish is useless and has no application is s-u-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e

not o-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e.

Actually i'll think you'll find that that view is "O-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E" better known as objective.

Why is it completely useless and without application in modern day Ireland? Let's first define the word "language":

The method of human communication, either spoken or written, consisting of the use of words in a structured and conventional way.

The key word there is "human communication". At present there are absolutely no benefits whatsoever in using Irish over English as a language. It isn't any easier to use, it isn't any more expressive and the audience of common speakers is incredibly limited. Couple that with the fact that anyone who knows Irish also knows English and it becomes clear that Irish has become a niche language much like Ancient Greek or Latin. Nice to know for studying history and culture but not at all essential for day-to-day life.

If a language is essentially a communicative tool and considering that Irish is no longer competent in this role, could you please justify why people are mandated to study it? Before you say it, culture and history can be taught in the history class. It doesn't need to be taught halfheartedly packaged within a language.

DepoProvera

I would even go further to say that it is of a lesser level than Greek or Latin. Knowledge of these languages opens up the possibility of reading thousands of classical texts and gives you an etymology base which greatly aids the understanding of other European languages and to a lesser extend the Sciences.

Someone made reference to East Asian cultural attitudes to education, which is very salient point, as contemporary Irish attitudes to education sometimes stinks. Certain Asian countries (South Korea for example) have a remarkable attitude to education. Teachers are regarded as nation builders and students wouldn't dare flake off to the extent that some would in Ireland as they know what they owe to their parents and a system that provides them an opportunity to learn. This even holds true for what are ostensibly 'useless' subjects such as philosophy and defunct Chinese characters.

Student's attitudes to education are intrinsically linked the education that they have received. Perhaps having something that has no bearing on their lives thrust down their throats for 14 years might have something to do with eroding the respect held for educators? And how dare you suggest that not wanting to learn Irish means that we do not value education or the efforts of our parents? That is a sweeping and offensive generalisation and is simply untrue.

South Korea, China etc do have a different attitude towards education. 'Grinding away' from play school onwards is the chosen method. Parents literally fight tooth and nail to get their kids into private play schools over there as education is literally the only way to break out of their crippling poverty. While, yes, students could be more determined over here, but I don't think the comparison is just or relevant.

And I don't think anyone has claimed nor would claim that Philosophy is useless. It is the prime example of something that does not have any tangible economic benefit, yet is extremely beneficial to the development of the individual.

learning any language presented to you to the best of your ability is extremely good for further language acquisition, leaving aside all cultural arguements

And yes, I said this earlier. But my point, that you didn't address, was that any learning is beneficial, but as some things are more beneficial than others, resources should be directed accordingly. My o my I feel like a parrot, but this just isn't sinking in, is it?

RadioClash

DepoProvera wrote: »

I would even go further to say that it is of a lesser level than Greek or Latin. Knowledge of these languages opens up the possibility of reading thousands of classical texts and gives you an etymology base which greatly aids the understanding of other European languages and to a lesser extend the Sciences.


Student's attitudes to education are intrinsically linked the education that they have received. Perhaps having something that has no bearing on their lives thrust down their throats for 14 years might have something to do with eroding the respect held for educators? And how dare you suggest that not wanting to learn Irish means that we do not value education or the efforts of our parents? That is a sweeping and offensive generalisation and is simply untrue.

South Korea, China etc do have a different attitude towards education. 'Grinding away' from play school onwards is the chosen method. Parents literally fight tooth and nail to get their kids into private play schools over there as education is literally the only way to break out of their crippling poverty. While, yes, students could be more determined over here, but I don't think the comparison is just or relevant.

And I don't think anyone has claimed nor would claim that Philosophy is useless. It is the prime example of something that does not have any tangible economic benefit, yet is extremely beneficial to the development of the individual.


And yes, I said this earlier. But my point, that you didn't address, was that any learning is beneficial, but as some things are more beneficial than others, resources should be directed accordingly. My o my I feel like a parrot, but this just isn't sinking in, is it?

Crippling poverty in South Korea?? Stop it, you're killing me. Get a grip on your own country before you start talking nonsense about others.

Tangible benefit? Language is meant for communication, when people speak Irish, German, Hindi or any other language they're not thinking about tangible benefit, they're just communicating.

*Walks into room* 'hmmm I wonder what tangible benefit there would be if I spoke Japanese today'.

Irish is used by tens of thousands all over the country every day as a method of communication. Was I imagining things when I was speaking Irish with two of my mates yesterday? Quick, call the white coats! You're in denial about it's usage as a living language, and yes you're argument is s-u-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e (seriously, look it up).

partyatmygaff

You're still not making any sense.

A few thousand may speak Irish on a daily basis. Most of them also speak English to the same if not a higher degree so there's absolutely no need for anyone to study Irish to be able to communicate with this small subset of people.

It's no different from ancient greek or latin. I'm sure more people in the world speak Latin on a daily basis than Irish. Seeing as how Latin would be a more useful language to know than Irish, what is your justification for keeping Irish mandatory? What specific benefits does it offer to students?

Ronnie Binge

Irish is compulsory because successive generations of civil service policy makers believe that the Irish language will die out unless school students are compelled to study it.

Not exactly a vote of confidence in it. The hope is that enough of those forced to study it will take it up outside the school environment.

_LilyRose_

finality wrote: »

The teaching of Irish is a huge problem too. I've learnt German for six years and I'm almost fluent in it, I can speak it comfortably and converse in it without much trouble. Irish, on the other hand, I've learnt for 14 years and I just can't speak it. The grammar makes no sense to me as it was never explained clearly. I know for a fact that if Irish were taught in the same way as German I would have no issue with it.
In German I have loads of notes on grammar and on all sorts of things, in Irish I have never had any such notes. There's no structure to the way Irish is taught, and it's just presumed that people have an excellent grasp of it when that's not necessarily the case.

I've only just started reading this thread, so sorry if I'm repeating a previous post but, I think the fact that you personally never received good notes on Irish grammar or understood it properly is down to the fact that you never had a decent Irish teacher, not that the language is basically heiroglyphics, impossible to learn and should therefore be removed from schools. (I'm not claiming you said that, btw).

Personally, I love Irish (I'm a Leaving Cert student) and while I agree the grammar is difficult sometimes, it's no more so than any other language. Considering we only begin learning French/German etc. in 1st year, while we begin learning Irish 8 years before that, the expected level of the European language at LC is much the same as that of Irish, something I find baffling. I hate French- mostly due to the fact that I have a bad teacher. I love Irish because I love my teacher- she teaches us the grammar behind EVERY SINGLE WORD/PHRASE.

And in my case, my preference is not because I'm bad at French and good at Irish; I got an A in both in honours for the JC and I'm intelligent enough to be excellent at French if I cared enough to bother. (I'm normally modest- please ignore this- I'm trying to prove a point!)

It's simply because I have a great Irish teacher and a crap French one. I think that the opposite is true for you. So, I feel it's unfair for you to say that there's no structure to the way Irish is taught, simply because it's not done in the same way as German.

Sorry about the length!

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You're still not making any sense.

A few thousand may speak Irish on a daily basis. Most of them also speak English to the same if not a higher degree so there's absolutely no need for anyone to study Irish to be able to communicate with this small subset of people.

Have you ever spoken a language with someone despite you having another mutually shared language? If so, what was the rational in that?
If not, try it out sometime.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

It's no different from ancient greek or latin. I'm sure more people in the world speak Latin on a daily basis than Irish. Seeing as how Latin would be a more useful language to know than Irish, what is your justification for keeping Irish mandatory? What specific benefits does it offer to students?

Economic benefits? Not as many as other languages but they are there. You learn a language that has deep roots in our country, is part of our national makeup like or not, is part of why we think the way we think and how we see the world. Furthermore you will be able to use it and have an outlet for if you're bothered. Learning a language to a high standard over 14 years will have propriety benefits when you want to learn another language, if that is, you troubled yourself to listen and be open to it. If you reject it, tough titties, you missed out.

I also doubt more people speak Latin habitually outside the church everyday than Irish(and even counting in religious use I'm skeptical) , Latin has zero native speakers left. Doesn't make it unworthy of study though. Ancient Greek, wouldn't know but I'd suspect the same.

partyatmygaff

RadioClash wrote: »

Have you ever spoken a language with someone despite you having another mutually shared language? If so, what was the rational in that?
If not, try it out sometime.

Yes I did. I used the other language because it was more appropriate to the environment and because I knew the other person would understand it better. I didn't just use it for the craic.

Economic benefits? Not as many as other languages but they are there. You learn a language that has deep roots in our country, is part of our national makeup like or not, is part of why we think the way we think and how we see the world.

Economic benefits? Like what? Being able to understand the pointless Irish translations of legal documents that cost an arm and a leg to make? Or is it understanding the bilingual road signs?

Also, just because the language is historically significant in Ireland doesn't mean we have to learn about it.

Furthermore you will be able to use it and have an outlet for if you're bothered.

Yes, I can use Irish but why on earth would I?

Learning a language to a high standard over 14 years will have propriety benefits when you want to learn another language, if that is, you troubled yourself to listen and be open to it. If you reject it, tough titties, you missed out.

That's not a valid point. We are talking specifically about Irish. Why is Irish mandatory while other more useful languages such as French/Latin/Chinese are left un-offered or optional?

GaryIrv93

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You're still not making any sense.

A few thousand may speak Irish on a daily basis. Most of them also speak English to the same if not a higher degree so there's absolutely no need for anyone to study Irish to be able to communicate with this small subset of people.

It's no different from ancient greek or latin. I'm sure more people in the world speak Latin on a daily basis than Irish. Seeing as how Latin would be a more useful language to know than Irish, what is your justification for keeping Irish mandatory? What specific benefits does it offer to students?

I agree - why should the minority win over the majority?

RadioClash

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Yes I did. I used the other language because it was more appropriate to the environment and because I knew the other person would understand it better. I didn't just use it for the craic.

I said mutually shared language.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Economic benefits? Like what? Being able to understand the pointless Irish translations of legal documents that cost an arm and a leg to make? Or is it understanding the bilingual road signs?

Droll, but One of my mates works as an Irish language journalist, another teaches it in the States at a private college (yes foreigners learning it), another as aforementioned legal translator. Use your imagination.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Also, just because the language is historically significant in Ireland doesn't mean we have to learn about it.

Yes, I can use Irish but why on earth would I?

Irish stays mandatory, mop up your tears. If you didn't have the imagination to use Irish, that's a shame but thousands of others have benefited from learning it and using it

partyatmygaff wrote: »

That's not a valid point. We are talking specifically about Irish. Why is Irish mandatory while other more useful languages such as French/Latin/Chinese are left un-offered or optional?

It is a valid point and it's been done to death. We have the teaching infrastructure to teach compulsory Irish, we most certainly do not for Chinese. French is offered in every school I know of so you can stop the whinge there(and if it was mandatory I don't doubt for a second there would be whinge threads like this).
Link on Latin being more used as a vernacular or GTFO.

RadioClash

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

I agree - why should the minority win over the majority?

No education system is a democracy.

jumpguy

RadioClash wrote: »

I get it just fine. Saying Irish is useless and has no application is s-u-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e

not o-b-j-e-c-t-i-v-e.

RadioClash wrote: »

Irish stays mandatory, mop up your tears. If you didn't have the imagination to use Irish, that's a shame but thousands of others have benefited from learning it and using it

Imagination? Oh dear, that sounds subjective to me.

As I said earlier in this thread, the Irish requirement for courses where it is not relevant (which is most of them) should be dropped, as should every other non-relevant requirement. For example, your knowledge of Hamlet shouldn't be the decider of whether you're fit to study computational mathematics. Nor should your language of Irish. At the Leaving Cert stage of the game, knowledge you don't want is just being stuffed down your throat.

Irish can still be mandatory for Junior Cert and a curriculum subject in primary school. Improve how it's taught and maybe you'll get more people choosing to do in Leaving Cert.

I think that's a view that'd satisfy all but the more extreme viewed people on this subject. Admittedly, I'd rather Irish be made completely optional all the way through second level. Latin would've been of far more use to me than Irish (because almost everything in scientific taxonomy comes back to Latin...)