How to revive the Irish language.

oldmangrub · 19-08-2012 10:31pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

And as such, I have yet to here a good reason as to how it benefits the student other then the culture/heritage/history buzzwords that people never seem to be able to define or actually explain the benefits of.

It depends on what you consider the purpose of education to be. If you're not interested in culture, heritage or history what would you like to teach children instead?
If you happen to agree with me that learning a second language from the age of 3/4 is important for cognitive development is there an alternative to Irish that we can afford?
And if we can improve the curriculum to the extent that relative fluency in Irish is achieved by students is this of benefit to the student and the language or just the latter? Or is there still an element of backwardness associated with Irish that prevents people from seeing learning it as an achievement in the first place?
To what extent should the education shape the child or the child shape the education?
Interesting philosophies that have been going back and forth for centuries. Apart from the Irish one. Sure feels like it's been going on for centuries now. I'm off to get my slippers and pipe.
Night night faceless entities, or oíche mhaith!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 19-08-2012 11:23pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

It depends on what you consider the purpose of education to be. If you're not interested in culture, heritage or history what would you like to teach children instead?
If you happen to agree with me that learning a second language from the age of 3/4 is important for cognitive development is there an alternative to Irish that we can afford?
And if we can improve the curriculum to the extent that relative fluency in Irish is achieved by students is this of benefit to the student and the language or just the latter? Or is there still an element of backwardness associated with Irish that prevents people from seeing learning it as an achievement in the first place?
To what extent should the education shape the child or the child shape the education?
Interesting philosophies that have been going back and forth for centuries. Apart from the Irish one. Sure feels like it's been going on for centuries now. I'm off to get my slippers and pipe.
Night night faceless entities, or oíche mhaith!

I never said I wasn't interested in culture and heritage, I just said that no one had yet come up with a clear defintion of what it was and how it benefitted the leaving cert student. People just seemed to take it as a universal truth that they were good things.

I also suggested some time ago that a single cultural syllabus incorporating Irish art, dance, music, langauge, GAA would probably be a better idea, but no one seemed interested.

Should a second language be compuslory? Possibly - but why does it have to be same langauge nation-wide? But I'm of the opinion that, by the age of 14 or so, and ten years studying, either the student should be able to decide for himself, or we're not educating properly. Whatever skills you teach, if you ultimately decide that the student is not capable of expressing a like or dislike, or a knowledge of their own abilities, then what's the point? They're just programmed robots at the end of the day.

For me, and education should shape the child at the start, but the child should shape their own education towards the end. Education shaping leaving cert students ceases to be education and starts being propaganda.

But we digress (and have been doing so for some time now!) because the point is: how do we revive the langauge. And the biggest problem faced is that people just can not think otuside the education box. Pradoxically, because their education never taught them how to.

TL-DR version
Let the student decide as much as possible, but give them the skills to be able to decide. If you don't, and you want to spoonfeed them until they're 18, all you're doing is indoctrinating them. Everyone thinks the same. No one knows how to do things differently. Which is one of the biggest reasons people don't know how to revive the language outside of education.

And who are you calling a faceless entity?!

opti0nal · 20-08-2012 7:56am

oldmangrub wrote: »

You beg to differ with what? That NUIM is a third level institution? Or that it's an independent public body?

You said that the document was published. by NUIM. It was a published by a private individual.

oldmangrub wrote: »

Do you suspect that the research was carried out incorrectly or altered?

The questions don't adequately measure the true level of support of Irish in terms of what personal commitment the person surveyed is making to the the revival of the language. True supporters of Irish, speak Irish. Most people in Ireland don't.

oldmangrub wrote: »

The Official Language Act was introduced in 2003. I see no evidence that is has had any impact whatsoever on the demand for Irish.

An expensive office in Spiddal, demands for all public services to be provide in Irish, all public signage to be changed.

oldmangrub wrote: »

Do you think we should learn Polish from the age of four? Rather than asking for justifications for Irish being taught in primary school and providing no reasons why it shouldn't, maybe you could suggest reasons for Polish? Again, I'd be happy to discuss them.

No, I think Russian or Mandarin would be better economic choices. German and Spanish are also good candidates for the precious time of schoolchildren.

My point about Polish speakers in the statistics is that they're obviously genuine Polish speakers whereas given the figures for Irish may include people who don't speak Irish all the time but just say they do. How is the claimed proficiency and frequency of Irish-speaking verified?

oldmangrub wrote: »

are you saying that kids weren't beaten in schools for speaking Irish? Is that the point you're making? What are you basing this on?

The lack of evidence provided by you that this is the case.

oldmangrub wrote: »

Most people accept that Irish will never replace English as our common language.

Except the members of CNAG, which represents the Irish Language Movement.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 9:20am

Optional, I don't think there's any point even quoting you. The source I gave for the survey is on the thread. You perhaps define public and private in your own unique way but that's going off tangent and I said we could agree to disagree. You're stating opinions about what matters in supporting Irish as if they are facts. Facts don't need to be supported, opinions do. Convenient for you perhaps. You quote me and instead of discussing the point, mention offices in Spiddal that don't support your original point without even attempting to show how it does. You're saying some languages are better economic choices and not supporting your opinion. You mention language proficiency in the adult population without offering opposing research or even explaining why it matters. They omitted stating explicitly in whatever article you read that educators carried out beatings because it's presumed obvious by context. Articles can't be all written to the cognitive standards of infants. "Annie ate the apple"- "How did she eat the apple?" "With her mouth." "Tally sticks were used in classrooms" should suffice. You may google the word represent and you'll find a dictionary definition.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

But I'm of the opinion that, by the age of 14 or so, and ten years studying, either the student should be able to decide for himself, or we're not educating properly.

I completely agree with you about Irish as a core subject for the Leaving Certificate. Or indeed any core subject for the reasons you mentioned. I don't have a problem with the seven core subjects we have at Junior Certificate level though many of them could be tackled as part of a cross-curricular approach; I'm thinking of C.S.P.E and S.P.H.E in particular. I actually would prefer if the Junior Certificate was done at fifteen or sixteen. I don't personally think it would benefit students to decide at fourteen, (maybe I've too little faith in youth) but I more or less agree with you.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Should a second language be compuslory? Possibly - but why does it have to be same langauge nation-wide?

No, it certainly doesn't. I think it would be great if there were bilingual schools in French, German etc. However, it would require drumming up demand for a particular language in a particular community. It would probably require private funding. Presently we're nowhere near meeting the demand for Gaelscoils and that's with sufficient support and doesn't cost the state or parents anything. I imagine the DOE would have the same opposition to French, German or Polish bilingual schools that they seem to have to Gaelscoils at the moment.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I never said I wasn't interested in culture and heritage, I just said that no one had yet come up with a clear defintion of what it was and how it benefitted the leaving cert student. People just seemed to take it as a universal truth that they were good things. I also suggested some time ago that a single cultural syllabus incorporating Irish art, dance, music, langauge, GAA would probably be a better idea, but no one seemed interested.

Coming up with a clear definition of culture and heritage is a bit of an ask. I would put it under the bracket of knowledge about and engagement in the world around you. By broaching the idea of a cultural syllabus at all you do seem to think it would benefit students in some manner. Irish art, dance, music and the GAA are accounted for in a cross-curricular sense across primary and secondary curricula. If you're suggesting that the Irish language syllabus at secondary level be diluted with art, dance, music and the GAA I think it would significantly dumb down the subject. The secondary school curricular should be geared in the most part towards specialised knowledge in my view, not so much things the students are capable of understanding on their own in a small amount of time. If you're talking about incorporating them into the primary syllabus that's already in practise.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

But we digress (and have been doing so for some time now!) because the point is: how do we revive the langauge. And the biggest problem faced is that people just can not think otuside the education box. Pradoxically, because their education never taught them how to.

At some point if you want to revive the language you need to start by learning it so it is inextricably linked with education, though education won't conjure up a mass revival. I don't believe that will happen anyway. If the demand for Gaelscoils was met, there would be a huge increase in the number of people that can speak Irish and can be spoken to in Irish so education certainly could have a very large role. Those that have little interest in Irish can only think inside the education box as that's their only experience of it. I don't know if I agree that they haven't been taught differently. They usually ignore Irish by their own choice and I don't think there's much point challenging that outside education. There are community groups, social networks, media, entertainment and organisations available for people who do have an interest in Irish.

I'm calling us all faceless entities. Technology is still a novelty to me.

An Coilean · 20-08-2012 10:04am

opti0nal wrote: »

Except the members of CNAG, which represents the Irish Language Movement.

Since when? The days of CnaG being the only Irish language organisaion are long gone. The Irish Language movement is far from being a single homogeneous entity, there is really no single organization that can claim to represent the whole.
Even if there was it would more likely be one of the umbrella organisations like Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge, or Pobal in the North.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 1:31pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

Coming up with a clear definition of culture and heritage is a bit of an ask. I would put it under the bracket of knowledge about and engagement in the world around you. By broaching the idea of a cultural syllabus at all you do seem to think it would benefit students in some manner. Irish art, dance, music and the GAA are accounted for in a cross-curricular sense across primary and secondary curricula. If you're suggesting that the Irish language syllabus at secondary level be diluted with art, dance, music and the GAA I think it would significantly dumb down the subject. The secondary school curricular should be geared in the most part towards specialised knowledge in my view, not so much things the students are capable of understanding on their own in a small amount of time. If you're talking about incorporating them into the primary syllabus that's already in practise.

It was kind a of a trade-off suggestion. But my point is that people throw these words aroudn as if they're soem kind of universal truths. Culture did nothign for me, I'm not the only one. The Irish language held me back, and I'm not the only one. And I know a lof people got a lot from it, but there seems to be some sort od automatic idea that it is there fore vital to eveyone. It simpey isn't. So the question was, how do you define "culture" and "heritage" and why are they so important?

At some point if you want to revive the language you need to start by learning it so it is inextricably linked with education, though education won't conjure up a mass revival. I don't believe that will happen anyway. If the demand for Gaelscoils was met, there would be a huge increase in the number of people that can speak Irish and can be spoken to in Irish so education certainly could have a very large role. Those that have little interest in Irish can only think inside the education box as that's their only experience of it. I don't know if I agree that they haven't been taught differently. They usually ignore Irish by their own choice and I don't think there's much point challenging that outside education. There are community groups, social networks, media, entertainment and organisations available for people who do have an interest in Irish.

By education, I meant state exam education. A lot of adults want to learn Irish and there are evenign courses and other facilities open to them, and, while this also qualifies as education, it does so in a different context.

And also: why is no one trying to sell the lanaguge to kids as something other than a school subject? There are social networks and media, but how many kid s are using it? Why are they not being "sold" to non Irish speaking kids? There is a certain sense of preaching to the choir about this.

I have little interest in the lanaguge, but I've come up with two or three suggestions now, that just get ignored.

An Coilean · 20-08-2012 1:54pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

And also: why is no one trying to sell the lanaguge to kids as something other than a school subject? There are social networks and media, but how many kid s are using it? Why are they not being "sold" to non Irish speaking kids? There is a certain sense of preaching to the choir about this.

Of course that is happening, In almost every third level institution there is an Irish language society, and they tend to be quite successful. In UCD, Trinity and UCC the Cumann Gaelach is one of the Largest societies on campus.

Student run Irish societies are starting to be set up in secondary schools also, both Foras na Gaeilge and Glor na nGeal run competitions to encourage the spread of them.

Conradh na Gaeilge have run a campaign over the last few summers speaking to the kids at the various Gaeltacht summer camps around the country.

Its actually going quite well, youth involvment in the Irish language is groing every year.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 2:05pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Of course that is happening, In almost every third level institution there is an Irish language society, and they tend to be quite successful. In UCD, Trinity and UCC the Cumann Gaelach is one of the Largest societies on campus.

Student run Irish societies are starting to be set up in secondary schools also, both Foras na Gaeilge and Glor na nGeal run competitions to encourage the spread of them.

Conradh na Gaeilge have run a campaign over the last few summers speaking to the kids at the various Gaeltacht summer camps around the country.

Its actually going quite well, youth involvment in the Irish language is groing every year.

This kind of spells out the points I make:
1 - It's happening more at adult level than child/teenager level
2 - Conragh na G are wasting their time targetign summer camps in teh Gaeltacht: as I said, preaching to the choir.

That said, the point about Irish societies starting up is good - but again, it;s happening in schools where the asscoaition is going to be with it as a school subject, but it comes back to the same problem as all the points you make: you have taken the education system or the Gaeltach as a base.

It needs to happen more in extra-curricular activies, such as soccer, boxing, swimming, ballet, art clubs, or whatever kids do these days. And it needs to happen wheer Irish isn;t seen as a popular choice. Go for what the enjoy doing it and introduce it there. Do it gradually and on a fun base. The boxing coach have the occasion 30-second chat with his 10-year-old boxer as Gaelige. The art teacher doing the occasional sketch in both languages. They doesn't have to be fluent, or even conversational. THIS is what I mean by outside the education box.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 2:33pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It was kind a of a trade-off suggestion. But my point is that people throw these words aroudn as if they're soem kind of universal truths. Culture did nothign for me, I'm not the only one. The Irish language held me back, and I'm not the only one. And I know a lof people got a lot from it, but there seems to be some sort od automatic idea that it is there fore vital to eveyone. It simpey isn't. So the question was, how do you define "culture" and "heritage" and why are they so important?

As I said, it depends what you consider important. Put simply, culture and heritage are the customs and histories of any people. That's why I'd put culture and heritage under the bracket of knowledge of and engagement with the world around you. I don't think there is an automatic idea that it is 'vital' for everyone, 'valid' would be a more appropriate term. There is a widely held assumption that culture is valid.
The Irish language is a language, it doesn't have the power to hold you back. Learning Irish enhances your knowledge of Irish and can't impact negatively on your intellectual development. I think you might be thinking in the education box, which is fine, but combining that with philosophical questions about defining culture confuses the argument. How and ever, I don't think Irish is vital for everyone. And I don't think people who have no interest in it or see it as something holding them back should be taught it beyond the Junior Cert. It's bad for them, bad for their class-mates and bad for the language.

As for the extra-curricular activities, there appears to be a lot of them, and they're on the increase. There is a fine line Irish organisations have to walk on; opening any sort of club exclusively for Irish can be seen as elitist. Cú Giobach made a good point about what happens in social gatherings when Irish is not the dominant language. He quoted this;

As long ago as the early 1970', in a major research report, the Committee on Irish Language Attitude Research (Report 1975) drew attention to the effect of social language norms on the speaking of Irish.
The norms identified restrict the speaking of Irish to situations in which the participants know each other's language competence, know that each participant wishes to speak Irish and know that none of the participants is a non-speaker of Irish.
The absence of any one of these conditions will normally guarantee that the conversation will be in English.

It can be awkward and embarrassing to speak a language to someone with a notably higher or poorer standard than yourself. And a lot of supporters of the language are embarrassed by their own level of attainment sadly.

An Coilean · 20-08-2012 2:39pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

This kind of spells out the points I make:
1 - It's happening more at adult level than child/teenager level
2 - Conragh na G are wasting their time targetign summer camps in teh Gaeltacht: as I said, preaching to the choir.

That said, the point about Irish societies starting up is good - but again, it;s happening in schools where the asscoaition is going to be with it as a school subject, but it comes back to the same problem as all the points you make: you have taken the education system or the Gaeltach as a base.

It needs to happen more in extra-curricular activies, such as soccer, boxing, swimming, ballet, art clubs, or whatever kids do these days. And it needs to happen wheer Irish isn;t seen as a popular choice. Go for what the enjoy doing it and introduce it there. Do it gradually and on a fun base. The boxing coach have the occasion 30-second chat with his 10-year-old boxer as Gaelige. The art teacher doing the occasional sketch in both languages. They doesn't have to be fluent, or even conversational. THIS is what I mean by outside the education box.

Summer Courses in the Gaeltacht cater to 20,000 students + every year. If they were all in the choir, there would not be a problem. Most students who go on one are not involved in the Irish Language outside the Class Room, you often here kids coming off those courses saying that they would love to carry on using Irish in a fun way at home or in school, but invariably that dose not happen because the oppertunity is not there.
Thats what the CnaG campaign is aimed at, showing those kids how they can use their Irish when they get back home and back to school. They got to speak to around 12,000 kids last summer.

Outside of schools there are youth clubs that operate through Irish, Ogras, Og-Ogras and Cumann na bhFiann, though I do take your point, the problem is that to organise a club directed at a specific thing, Ballet for example, you need a concentration of young people interested in doing that in Irish. In Dublin you can get that concentration, there was recently a GAA Club set up that operates through Irish.

Irish societies in schools, and universities are extra curricular, they are run by the students themselves, not the teachers. They do a wide range of activities, its up to the members themselves what they want to try.
Personally I have more experiance at third level with them than at second level. Believe me though a good Cumann Gaelach has nothing to do with learning Irish in a Class room.

The problem with getting a boxing coach or Art teacher to use a little bit of Irish with the kids they are teaching is that 1) they probably don't have any Irish themselves, 2) they probably don't care and 3) no one has told them to, they are there to teach boxing, not Irish.
This is not to say it dose'nt happen now and again, its just very hard to actually implement.

Overall getting a Cumann Gaelach set up in a secondary school still gets the Language out of the class room, once the students themselves are in charge of it, then they can do what they want to, they have ownership of it and get to use it in a fun way.
For those promoting Irish this is a more practicle and achievable goal, in my opinion.

LeeroyJ. · 20-08-2012 2:44pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

As I said, it depends what you consider important. Put simply, culture and heritage are the customs and histories of any people. That's why I'd put culture and heritage under the bracket of knowledge of and engagement with the world around you. I don't think there is an automatic idea that it is 'vital' for everyone, 'valid' would be a more appropriate term. There is a widely held assumption that culture is valid.
The Irish language is a language, it doesn't have the power to hold you back. Learning Irish enhances your knowledge of Irish and can't impact negatively on your intellectual development. I think you might be thinking in the education box, which is fine, but combining that with philosophical questions about defining culture confuses the argument. How and ever, I don't think Irish is vital for everyone. And I don't think people who have no interest in it or see it as something holding them back should be taught it beyond the Junior Cert. It's bad for them, bad for their class-mates and bad for the language.

As for the extra-curricular activities, there appears to be a lot of them, and they're on the increase. There is a fine line Irish organisations have to walk on; opening any sort of club exclusively for Irish can be seen as elitist. Cú Giobach made a good point about what happens in social gatherings when Irish is not the dominant language. He quoted this;

It can be awkward and embarrassing to speak a language to someone with a notably higher or poorer standard than yourself. And a lot of supporters of the language are embarrassed by their own level of attainment sadly.

To take on the unemployment rate once more, there are so many international companies in Dublin and Ireland and you know who they are employing?

German, French, Spanish, Portugese,Polish, Americans, English etc.

Why? Because they are teaching their children 2nd and third languages as of the first grade that actually matter and have a use in this modern world. It's great that having learnt Irish makes you feel more Irish but this should be a the choice of the parents since Ireland is in fact English speaking. And yes I do blame part of the economic problems on the school and language system and that is why we have a unemployment rate of almost 15%.

These companies could be hiring Irish people but because of this they prefer to pay for foreigner to move to Ireland to work for them.

Great system. We can all see how this is working out here.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 2:48pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Summer Courses in the Gaeltacht cater to 20,000 students + every year. If they were all in the choir, there would not be a problem. Most students who go on one are not involved in the Irish Language outside the Class Room, you often here kids coming off those courses saying that they would love to carry on using Irish in a fun way at home or in school, but invariably that dose not happen because the oppertunity is not there.
Thats what the CnaG campaign is aimed at, showing those kids how they can use their Irish when they get back home and back to school. They got to speak to around 12,000 kids last summer.

... but they're going to the Gaeltacht, that's my point! They're already interested!

The other porblem, as you outline yourself is that there is no outlet once tey get home. Read on...

Outside of schools there are youth clubs that operate through Irish, Ogras, Og-Ogras and Cumann na bhFiann, though I do take your point, the problem is that to organise a club directed at a specific thing, Ballet for example, you need a concentration of young people interested in doing that in Irish. In Dublin you can get that concentration, there was recently a GAA Club set up that operates through Irish.

No you don't. I never said do the enitre class in Irish - that wouldn't work. Just have the teacher or coach introduce Irish gradually, so that kids see it as something that is not just in school, not just in the gaelteach and not just some after-school club. Those that are looking for the outlet, will have it. Those that don't, may see Irish as not being a school subject.

Irish societies in schools, and universities are extra curricular, they are run by the students themselves, not the teachers. They do a wide range of activities, its up to the members themselves what they want to try.
Personally I have more experiance at third level with them than at second level. Believe me though a good Cumann Gaelach has nothing to do with learning Irish in a Class room.

But they are STILL associated with school to the disinterested student. Take it from me - I was one.

The problem with getting a boxing coach or Art teacher to use a little bit of Irish with the kids they are teaching is that 1) they probably don't have any Irish themselves, 2) they probably don't care and 3) no one has told them to, they are there to teach boxing, not Irish.
This is not to say it dose'nt happen now and again, its just very hard to actually implement.

"Probably"?? Sorry, but if you attitude is the people you are targeting don't care, you have no hope in hell of selling it. No wonder the langauge is mkaing no progress if this is the attitude.

They'll have some expereince. Some focal. They may be disinterested, but if the see role models speaking it, they might see it in a different light.

If you only target poeple who are already interested, you'll never get results.

Overall getting a Cumann Gaelach set up in a secondary school still gets the Language out of the class room, once the students themselves are in charge of it, then they can do what they want to, they have ownership of it and get to use it in a fun way.
For those promoting Irish this is a more practicle and achievable goal, in my opinion.

Again, preaching to the choir. You're targeting the kids who are already intrested.

You've already excluded the bulk of your target audience by predicting that they probably don't care. Some won't, but some will.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 3:12pm

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

To take on the unemployment rate once more, there are so many international companies in Dublin and Ireland and you know who they are employing?

German, French, Spanish, Portugese,Polish, Americans, English etc.

Why? Because they are teaching their children 2nd and third languages as of the first grade that actually matter and have a use in this modern world. It's great that having learnt Irish makes you feel more Irish but this should be a the choice of the parents since Ireland is in fact English speaking. And yes I do blame part of the economic problems on the school and language system and that is why we have a unemployment rate of almost 15%.

These companies could be hiring Irish people but because of this they prefer to pay for foreigner to move to Ireland to work for them.

Great system. We can all see how this is working out here.

In my opinion, the reason why those nationalities are superior at language learning is because they were exposed to a second language from the age of 3/4. If the demand for Gaelscoils was met, and if primary schools were to become bilingual in general, it would facilitate language acquisition and literacy at second level and in general. German, French, Spanish bilingual primary schools would do just as good a job and there could well be demand and therefore funding for them in the future. The education system can't be democratic because it would be too difficult to fund. I don't believe people who speak Irish are more Irish and you're putting your own words down hypothetical Irish-speakers' throats. The Irish language is not a cause of our unemployment rate.

Do you have any links that support the notion that our international companies are hiring Europeans en masse? Because it hasn't been in the news, which it would be if it were a problem. If they want Irish people with a European language (other than English or Irish) they should look at the Teach na nGealt forum. There seems to be a lot of multi-linguists there. In spite of Irish being considered a valid part of the school curriculum I'm sure.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 3:27pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

As I said, it depends what you consider important. Put simply, culture and heritage are the customs and histories of any people. That's why I'd put culture and heritage under the bracket of knowledge of and engagement with the world around you. I don't think there is an automatic idea that it is 'vital' for everyone, 'valid' would be a more appropriate term. There is a widely held assumption that culture is valid.

Fair enough. Personally, I wouldn;t even go as far as valid, but that's just me.

The Irish language is a language, it doesn't have the power to hold you back. Learning Irish enhances your knowledge of Irish and can't impact negatively on your intellectual development. I think you might be thinking in the education box, which is fine, but combining that with philosophical questions about defining culture confuses the argument. How and ever, I don't think Irish is vital for everyone. And I don't think people who have no interest in it or see it as something holding them back should be taught it beyond the Junior Cert. It's bad for them, bad for their class-mates and bad for the language.

It literally did - I got held back in second class, purely because my Irish was weak. Everything else was fine.

Also, when I wanted to take French at the start of secodary school, it was suggested I didn;t because, again, I was having trouble with Irish. Admittedly, just suggested and I probably should have been a bit more forceful with them, but I don't think they would have accpeted me droppign Irish and starting a new language.

As for the extra-curricular activities, there appears to be a lot of them, and they're on the increase. There is a fine line Irish organisations have to walk on; opening any sort of club exclusively for Irish can be seen as elitist. Cú Giobach made a good point about what happens in social gatherings when Irish is not the dominant language. He quoted this;

It can be awkward and embarrassing to speak a language to someone with a notably higher or poorer standard than yourself. And a lot of supporters of the language are embarrassed by their own level of attainment sadly.

I'm not nessecarily talking, as I said to An Coilean, about entire activities for the sole purpose of Irish. Just a place or activity that already exists, where the occasionaly as gaelige conversatino takes place so it's not assocaited with the classroom.

Also, the emphasis would be in the higher-standard guys to wlecome to newbies in. Been in this position myself as the higher standard (not in a langauge setting, obviously) and you have to tackle the intimidation factor fro the onset.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 3:54pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It literally did - I got held back in second class, purely because my Irish was weak. Everything else was fine.

Also, when I wanted to take French at the start of secodary school, it was suggested I didn;t because, again, I was having trouble with Irish.

That's what I meant about combining culture and education in the same argument. Irish didn't hold you back. The education system did. In an ideal scenario, the DoE would take language acquisition in general more seriously and Irish teaching would be a help, not a hindrance. The teachers considered you poor at languages, and with the measly hours given to them, you probably were! Now you're living in Berlin and presumably speaking German. It's an indication of a poor education system, not an indictment of Irish or culture in itself.

I think your ideas on promoting Irish are very constructive and also generous considering your stance on culture.

An Coilean · 20-08-2012 4:06pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

... but they're going to the Gaeltacht, that's my point! They're already interested!

Well lets ignore the many who are there due to pushy parents - looming orals etc. The vast majority of kids who go on a summer camp in the gaeltacht, while interested in the language to an extent, are not involved with it beyond learning it in school.
Seems to me this is the perfect group to target.

No you don't. I never said do the enitre class in Irish - that wouldn't work. Just have the teacher or coach introduce Irish gradually, so that kids see it as something that is not just in school, not just in the gaelteach and not just some after-school club. Those that are looking for the outlet, will have it. Those that don't, may see Irish as not being a school subject.

Any ideas on how to implement this on a wide scale?

But they are STILL associated with school to the disinterested student. Take it from me - I was one.

Maybe so, but in schools where these societies exist, they do attract significant interest, they may be situated in schools, but that is where most social networks are situated at that age.

"Probably"?? Sorry, but if you attitude is the people you are targeting don't care, you have no hope in hell of selling it. No wonder the langauge is mkaing no progress if this is the attitude.

They'll have some expereince. Some focal. They may be disinterested, but if the see role models speaking it, they might see it in a different light.

If you only target poeple who are already interested, you'll never get results.

Its just stating fact, most boxing coaches etc will have very little or no Irish, it is not enough to say that they will have some cupla focal, no one in my experiance with only a cupla focal will take on using it in a class room situation with kids. Lack of confidence and fear of teaching bad Irish simply preclude people taking something like that on.
I would not want to put myself in that kind of situation and I would not expect someone else to do it either.

Again, preaching to the choir. You're targeting the kids who are already intrested.

You've already excluded the bulk of your target audience by predicting that they probably don't care. Some won't, but some will.

The whole point in setting up an Irish society in a school is that it is available to everyone in that school, the opportunity is there for all kids, those who are interested in it will take part, those who are not won't, that is about as good as you can hope for.

Just to clarify, in my own opinion what is really killing the language is simple lack of opportunity to use it outside the classroom, while it would be nice if art teachers, ballet schools etc etc took to using Irish now and again, I don't see how it is implementable. Ie, as someone interested in Irish, how would I make that happen?
At least by establishing Irish societies in schools, and other things like that, people who are actually interested in Irish get the change to use it, rather than in 20 years time wistfully saying I wish I had learned Irish.

opti0nal · 20-08-2012 5:22pm

An Coilean wrote: »

Since when? The days of CnaG being the only Irish language organisaion are long gone.

Since 18-something. It claims to represent all Irish organizations and has a main aim of restoring Irish as the common language of Ireland.

MysticalRain · 20-08-2012 5:33pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

In my opinion, the reason why those nationalities are superior at language learning is because they were exposed to a second language from the age of 3/4. If the demand for Gaelscoils was met, and if primary schools were to become bilingual in general, it would facilitate language acquisition and literacy at second level and in general. German, French, Spanish bilingual primary schools would do just as good a job and there could well be demand and therefore funding for them in the future. The education system can't be democratic because it would be too difficult to fund. I don't believe people who speak Irish are more Irish and you're putting your own words down hypothetical Irish-speakers' throats. The Irish language is not a cause of our unemployment rate.

Do you have any links that support the notion that our international companies are hiring Europeans en masse? Because it hasn't been in the news, which it would be if it were a problem. If they want Irish people with a European language (other than English or Irish) they should look at the Teach na nGealt forum. There seems to be a lot of multi-linguists there. In spite of Irish being considered a valid part of the school curriculum I'm sure.

The lack of foreign language and tech skills among Irish graduates is been well reported in the media during recent years.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/education/2011/1108/1224307200050.html

At company I work for, Irish staff are about 50% of the work force (the numbers of Irish staff at some companies is as low as 20%). We have to search as far as India to recruit staff for some of the more high end positions.

I'm all for having a multi-lingual education system. But the focus cannot be solely on Irish, especially at the national school level. Otherwise it is going to cost us economically.

indioblack · 20-08-2012 6:36pm

What would constitute a revival?
Universal fluency?
Fluency for a percentage of the population?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 6:49pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

That's what I meant about combining culture and education in the same argument. Irish didn't hold you back. The education system did. In an ideal scenario, the DoE would take language acquisition in general more seriously and Irish teaching would be a help, not a hindrance. The teachers considered you poor at languages, and with the measly hours given to them, you probably were! Now you're living in Berlin and presumably speaking German. It's an indication of a poor education system, not an indictment of Irish or culture in itself.

I think your ideas on promoting Irish are very constructive and also generous considering your stance on culture.

Different way of sayign the same thing. Education system at the time/over-emphasis on Irish.

My German's not great, but that's down to laziness, to be honest. It gets meby, though. I've always struggled with languages, but my biggest problem is simply not practicing enough.

That's for the input. As both a disinterested student (who abhorred the language for many years after leaving school) and someone who has worked a lot with kids, I can tell you I'm speaking from experience.

An Coilean wrote: »

Well lets ignore the many who are there due to pushy parents - looming orals etc. The vast majority of kids who go on a summer camp in the gaeltacht, while interested in the language to an extent, are not involved with it beyond learning it in school.
Seems to me this is the perfect group to target.

It's not. I'm not saying you shoudn't bother, but the people you want to reach are the people who are not bothered. You also run the risk of making the language eliteist.

Any ideas on how to implement this on a wide scale?

It's not rocket science - just encourage anyone who works with kids to do it. It's somthing, I'm sure, CnaG could implement a strategy for.

Its just stating fact, most boxing coaches etc will have very little or no Irish, it is not enough to say that they will have some cupla focal, no one in my experiance with only a cupla focal will take on using it in a class room situation with kids. Lack of confidence and fear of teaching bad Irish simply preclude people taking something like that on.
I would not want to put myself in that kind of situation and I would not expect someone else to do it either.

Sounds very pessimistic to me. It's like you're trying to shoot this down before even considering, If you get one coach encourage six kids, surely it'd be worth it?

On the other hand, if you don't you don't. Your loss.

The whole point in setting up an Irish society in a school is that it is available to everyone in that school, the opportunity is there for all kids, those who are interested in it will take part, those who are not won't, that is about as good as you can hope for.

Availablity =/= uptake.

Just to clarify, in my own opinion what is really killing the language is simple lack of opportunity to use it outside the classroom, while it would be nice if art teachers, ballet schools etc etc took to using Irish now and again, I don't see how it is implementable. Ie, as someone interested in Irish, how would I make that happen?
At least by establishing Irish societies in schools, and other things like that, people who are actually interested in Irish get the change to use it, rather than in 20 years time wistfully saying I wish I had learned Irish.

Do you work with kids? If so, would the occasional sentence in Irish really do that much damage?

I'm not saying don't introduce societies into schools, I'm sayign you'll only reach a fraction of your audience if you only do that.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 6:53pm

MysticalRain wrote: »

The lack of foreign language and tech skills among Irish graduates is been well reported in the media during recent years.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/education/2011/1108/1224307200050.html

At company I work for, Irish staff are about 50% of the work force (the numbers of Irish staff at some companies is as low as 20%). We have to search as far as India to recruit staff for some of the more high end positions.

I'm all for having a multi-lingual education system. But the focus cannot be solely on Irish, especially at the national school level. Otherwise it is going to cost us economically.

I think it's simplistic to blame the Irish language for the lack of foreign language or tech skills if that's what you're implying but otherwise I do agree with you. We should certainly strive to compete with other countries in terms of supplying multi-lingual graduates. We're not competing on an equal ground in the first place so I do worry how realistic this is in the short or medium term. You're always going to find better among those immersed in a language or exposed to it culturally. The English language is the most dominant language in social media, entertainment etc. You're going to encounter the same exposure problems as and I would say to a worse degree than the Irish language. Personally, I'd be happy if we just improved kids' ability to learn languages. Unfortunately, they will still have to travel abroad and really immerse themselves in the language to acquire the level of proficiency international companies require. Most of them won't benefit financially but some of them will.

MysticalRain · 20-08-2012 7:13pm

oldmangrub wrote: »

I think it's simplistic to blame the Irish language for the lack of foreign language or tech skills if that's what you're implying but otherwise I do agree with you. We should certainly strive to compete with other countries in terms of supplying multi-lingual graduates. We're not competing on an equal ground in the first place so I do worry how realistic this is in the short or medium term. You're always going to find better among those immersed in a language or exposed to it culturally. The English language is the most dominant language in social media, entertainment etc. You're going to encounter the same exposure problems as and I would say to a worse degree than the Irish language. Personally, I'd be happy if we just improved kids' ability to learn languages. Unfortunately, they will still have to travel abroad and really immerse themselves in the language to acquire the level of proficiency international companies require. Most of them won't benefit financially but some of them will.

I think it's not so much the langage itself, but the fact that for the first 7-8 years of a child's education, it is the only language taught. That's a missed opportunity. The younger a child is, the easier it is to teach them language skills.

Sure, we are at a disadvantage being a primarily English-speaking nation. But that means we need to put more effort into it. Not admit defeat and claim that we can't do it. It's not like it would even be that difficult to do. Many teachers are drawn for arts courses where they studied languages to begin with, and are probably more skilled at languages like French than they are at Irish.

The amount of time devoted to Irish also eats into teaching time for other subjects. Like Computer Science/IT Literacy for instance, which I am still amazed doesn't exist as subjects despite all the governments talk of a so called "smart economy". I can't see any way of introducing subjects like those ones, other than taking away time devoted to Irish.

opti0nal · 20-08-2012 7:30pm

indioblack wrote: »

Universal fluency?

'Common language of Ireland', i.e. we all speak it all of the time as our principal or main language. It's been the Main Aim of the Movement since the late 19th century.

That's why they're terrified of letting go of compulsory Irish lessons for English-speaking children and that's why the Official Languages Act (which includes fines and imprisonment for non-compliance) was introduced along with the Irish Language Enforcement Office in Spiddal.

MysticalRain wrote:

I think it's not so much the langage itself, but the fact that for the first 7-8 years of a child's education, it is the only language taught. That's a missed opportunity. The younger a child is, the easier it is to teach them language skills.

Languages are best learned in the home. At best, Irish learned at school, becomes a 'foreign language' for that child, just as if French or German had been learned.

That's why Polish thrives in Ireland without state support.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 7:40pm

opti0nal wrote: »

'Common language of Ireland', i.e. we all speak it all of the time as our principal or main language. It's been the Main Aim of the Movement since the late 19th century.

That's why they're terrified of letting go of compulsory Irish lessons for English-speaking children and that's why the Official Languages Act (which includes fines and imprisonment for non-compliance) was introduced along with the Irish Language Enforcement Office in Spiddal.

The who? What?!

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 7:53pm

MysticalRain wrote: »

Many teachers are drawn for arts courses where they studied languages to begin with, and are probably more skilled at languages like French than they are at Irish.

I know you do a substantial percentage (maybe about 25) of your BA in UCD through English if you study French, I assume it's a similar story for other languages and other universities here. In the leaving cert, the higher level French course is geared towards a lower competency level than the ordinary level Irish course and to become a primary school teacher you need an honour in Irish. I think Pats are moving away from having a BA component to their BEd (it's possibly already happened) and I think we can expect the standard of languages to drop among primary school teachers as a result. I don't think there's any other language we can teach bilingually at the moment and in my opinion we might as well make the best of it and use it as a platform for language acquisition. In my own idea of a bilingual school it wouldn't 'eat into' any other subject, as subjects would be taught through the medium of Irish and English. There might well be multi-lingual schools in the future and I believe bilingual schools could be a step towards that. I also think the demand for Gaelscoileanna should be met as these kids will be in a better position to speak a third language than the (however wrongly) monoglot schools with a cúpla focal thrown in that we have now.

opti0nal · 20-08-2012 8:19pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

The who? What?!

Who: The Conradh

What: The Main Aim.

They've been living among us for over 100 years.

An Coilean · 20-08-2012 8:22pm

opti0nal wrote: »

Who: The Conradh

What: The Main Aim.

They've been living among us for over 100 years.

Are you for real?

dan dan · 20-08-2012 8:25pm

Thats not at all harsh. I and all of my generation were daily beaten with sticks and leather straps. Years of this treatment by teachers whom had very bad irish themselves. left us hating the cursed thing.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 8:31pm

opti0nal wrote: »

Who: The Conradh

What: The Main Aim.

They've been living among us for over 100 years.

Didn't think it was, which is why I wasquerying it.

Also curious about what the Offical Langauges and non compliane bit (non compliance of what...?) not to mention this spiddal office.

Sure you're not David Icke-ing this thing up a bit?

Cú Giobach · 20-08-2012 8:55pm

Holy crap, a large number of immigrants enter the country speaking Polish because that is the main language of the country they come from and hence their native language, and we get comments like "Polish is spoken here and thriving without state support, so there".

Has ye gone mad or something.

opti0nal · 20-08-2012 9:18pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Didn't think it was, which is why I wasquerying it.

This is 'After Hours'?

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Also curious about what the Offical Langauges and non compliane bit (non compliance of what...?) not to mention this Spiddal office.

You mean you don't know?

Here's a picture of the mothership, presently located in Spiddal:

The Official Languages Act gives the Commissioner with special powers:

(4) A person who fails or refuses to comply with a requirement under this section or who hinders or obstructs the Commissioner in the performance of his or her functions under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or both.

Then there's those indoctrination camps in the west of Ireland....

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-08-2012 9:45pm

opti0nal wrote: »

This is 'After Hours'?

You mean you don't know?

Here's a picture of the mothership, presently located in Spiddal:

The Official Languages Act gives the Commissioner with special powers: Then there's those indoctrination camps in the west of Ireland....

... but this only relates to public service. Yes it's a bit of a vanity project and anyone who complains that the can not sign on In Irish even though they can speak perfectly good English is a pit of a pratt, but it's hardly some sort of regime!

I was half expecting some kind of indymedia/limguistic Westboro Baptist church, but as far as I can see, they're cute, but ultimatly harmless.

oldmangrub · 20-08-2012 9:46pm

When I saw the notifications for this thread I was anticipating but rather dreading further debate and discussion as I'm feeling far too lethargic.

So I'm relieved!
Optional, this isn't the men in black or zombieland. It's only a language, not a contagious disease.

Take it easy!

indioblack · 20-08-2012 9:49pm

indioblack wrote: »

What would constitute a revival?
Universal fluency?
Fluency for a percentage of the population?

The reason I asked these basic questions is that a lot of this thread has been about teaching the language and the educational system in general.
I've no experience of Irish schools myself - but you don't need to follow threads like these to realise that many regard the attempts to broadly re-introduce Irish into everyday life as failed policies.
How much of this can be laid at the door of the education system?
And what responsibilty falls on the shoulders of successive governments for this failure - when you look at it baldly it's suprising - since independance I'd have thought politicians would have seen the Irish language as worthy of as much resources as the country could afford.

Enkidu · 20-08-2012 10:54pm

opti0nal wrote: »

Since 18-something. It claims to represent all Irish organizations and has a main aim of restoring Irish as the common language of Ireland.

Well it can't have been the aim of Conradh na Gaedhilge since 1893, since Douglas Hyde even said it was impossible to even aim for having well-read Irish papers in his opening address and explicitly stated that his aim was not to re-gaelicise the country. Hyde only wished to preserve Irish, publish grammars and encourage literature in the language.

It was not until Piaras Béaslaí* (Pierce Beasley) essentially took over Conradh na Gaedhilge in 1915 with Patrick Pearse that the movement gained nationalist overtones and this aim of a totally Gaelic Ireland appeared. Many of the originally more scholarly members left at this point.

*An excellent writer, one of the better novels in Irish is a history novel about a fictional eastern European state which he wrote in 1912. However he was a total nut. Born in Liverpool.

dubhthach · 20-08-2012 11:58pm

MysticalRain wrote: »

The lack of foreign language and tech skills among Irish graduates is been well reported in the media during recent years.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/education/2011/1108/1224307200050.html

At company I work for, Irish staff are about 50% of the work force (the numbers of Irish staff at some companies is as low as 20%). We have to search as far as India to recruit staff for some of the more high end positions.

I'm all for having a multi-lingual education system. But the focus cannot be solely on Irish, especially at the national school level. Otherwise it is going to cost us economically.

Of course it doesn't help that the number of students selecting to do Technical /Comp Sci course plummeted during the early 00's. For example the IT degree in NUIG dropped from about 100 students in a year to 12 (circa 2005-6). This was repeated across the country. I know DCU halfed the size of their CompSci course so as to "buttress" the points it had.

Why did applicants drop these courses? Simple really, Greed tied up with the property bubble. People instead applied for courses connected to construction, law (conveyance fees), Quantitate Surveying etc. Alot of this of course was driven by the "mommies of Ireland" no doubt.

Given the massive drop in IT graduates form 2004/5 onwards it's no wonder we have an issue recruiting IT people. For example I have personal experience with it taking 3-4months to find someone for a Junior SysAdmin role. The problem is that there isn't enough people around with 2-3 years work experience for such roles. This is down to choices people made when they filled out their CSO forms back in the heady days of the property bubble.

As for languages, the main reason Google gave for setting up in Ireland (other then tax avoidance) is the fact that it was easier to find staff from any country in Europe in Dublin then it would be in most other European cities. They and other companies of their ilk want native speakers not L2 speakers with dodgy accents. Even if there was significant numbers of Irish people with fluent level ability in the 20+ languages they require they would probably still prefer hiring native speakers.

Either still these staff are still paying income tax/prsi/usc in Ireland and they spend a big chunk of their paypacket here. The fact is that it's lot easier to attract talent into the likes of Dublin from abroad then it to plenty of other cities in Europe.

I've close on 10 years work experience in tech industry (both multinational and small Irish businesses). The biggest issue over last couple years is simple fact that Irish students basically switched off from technical university courses (compare to late 90's anyways) and the property bubble was directly connected to this -- sure who needs to do a "hard course" when ye can make a living flipping houses to each other :rolleyes:

An Coilean · 21-08-2012 12:16am

opti0nal wrote: »

The Main Aim.

They've been living among us for over 100 years.

Then there's those indoctrination camps in the west of Ireland....

Cant get this picture out of my head

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 6:19am

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The reason I try to avoid the subject of compulsion, is that after years of thinking about it I cannot decide in my own head between the pros and cons,therefore it would be just a choice of the moment which side I could debate.

Writing as a philospher engaged in the education, Kevin Williams wrote the following in "Studies" Vol 78 No. 310.

"I would suggest that where a pupil learns Irish or any other subject solely as a consequence of compulsion, physical or psychological, this learning does not count as genuinely educative. This is because learning can be characterised as truly educative only where it is undertaken because of some intrinsic value found in the subject or activity in question. The same can be said of the use of inducements to get pupils to learn Irish as these are but a feature of what is ultimately a manipulative rather than an educational relationship. Such a relationship is clearly at odds with the spirit of engagement to initiate young people into the language as an end in itself, or as being valuable on its own account."

So what has happened in this educational matter? What has happened is that the impositions were not put there for educational purposes but for political ones.Compulsion is not a technique of education but one of power politics. Compulsion does not emanate from any desire to educate but from the desire to control. Compulsory Irish is a manifestation of the crude thinking of ignorant politicians whose purposes relate to power, not to education.

opti0nal · 21-08-2012 6:38am

An Coilean wrote: »

Cant get this picture out of my head

I hope you can see the irony of this.

Cú Giobach · 21-08-2012 6:47am

Interest in History wrote: »

Writing as a philospher engaged in the education, Kevin Williams wrote the following in "Studies" Vol 78 No. 310.

"I would suggest that where a pupil learns Irish or any other subject solely as a consequence of compulsion, physical or psychological, this learning does not count as genuinely educative. This is because learning can be characterised as truly educative only where it is undertaken because of some intrinsic value found in the subject or activity in question. The same can be said of the use of inducements to get pupils to learn Irish as these are but a feature of what is ultimately a manipulative rather than an educational relationship. Such a relationship is clearly at odds with the spirit of engagement to initiate young people into the language as an end in itself, or as being valuable on its own account."

So what has happened in this educational matter? What has happened is that the impositions were not put there for educational purposes but for political ones.Compulsion is not a technique of education but one of power politics. Compulsion does not emanate from any desire to educate but from the desire to control. Compulsory Irish is a manifestation of the crude thinking of ignorant politicians whose purposes relate to power, not to education.

.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

1. Compelling people to learn a language in school can foster a dislike of the language which can be counter-productive, and though the evidence appears to show this is a short time dislike here, the oppertunity to learn quite a bit of the language is then lost due to a lack of interest. Plus an educational system alone will not automatically produce viable speakers of a language that is then brought to "community use".

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 6:57am

indioblack wrote: »

........I've no experience of Irish schools myself - but you don't need to follow threads like these to realise that many regard the attempts to broadly re-introduce Irish into everyday life as failure...
How much of this can be laid at the door of the education system?
And what responsibilty falls on the shoulders of successive governments for this failure - when you look at it baldly it's suprising - since independance I'd have thought politicians would have seen the Irish language as worthy of as much resources as the country could afford.

The politians are focused on their need to show that our independent state is "Not England". The Irish language provides them with a brand image that shows that. No politician actually believes that the population will adopt Irish as a vernacular and no politician cares, because the purpose of the brand image is served by Irish irrespective of anybody speaking it.

As for using the education system: Eoin MacNeill, the first Minsister for Education, and Michael McDowell's ancestor, said: "you might as well be putting wooden legs on hens as trying to restore Irish through the school system". (Quoted in Joe Lee's "Ireland 1912 -1985"). But still he was willing to distort the whole education system for which he was responsible. Can there be a worse example of the cynical abuse of political power?

As for the effects on literacy of using the education system in this way, nobody put it better that Eamonn de Valera, and Eamon O Cuív's ancestor, did in the Dáil in 1936:

"There is no doubt that the child who, to-day, is doing Irish as well as English, has to a certain extent double the work, so far as reading and writing are concerned, and if you want to get that language in the same time you must necessarily fall short of what was done when there was only one language involved... We shall have to be satisfied with a less high standard in Engliskh. There is no other way for it."

Well: he got his way!

Cú Giobach · 21-08-2012 7:12am

Interest in History wrote: »

As for the effects on literacy of using the education system in this way, nobody put it better that Eamonn de Valera, and Eamon O Cuív's ancestor, did in the Dáil in 1936:

"There is no doubt that the child who, to-day, is doing Irish as well as English, has to a certain extent double the work, so far as reading and writing are concerned, and if you want to get that language in the same time you must necessarily fall short of what was done when there was only one language involved... We shall have to be satisfied with a less high standard in Engliskh. There is no other way for it."

Well: he got his way!

Are you trying to say here that the learning of a second language in school is detrimental to literacy and the learning of English?
If that is correct then the standard of languages and literacy across Europe (not to mention the world) must be very poor, due to the sheer number who learn second languages at school.

I just want add here the thoughts of people a bit more familiar with the subject than Dev.
Cognitive benefits of learning a language.

Yes, because it has been shown to enhance children's cognitive development. Children who learn a foreign language beginning in early childhood demonstrate certain cognitive advantages over children who do not. Research conducted in Canada with young children shows that those who are bilingual develop the concept of "object permanence" at an earlier age. Bilingual students learn sooner that an object remains the same, even though the object has a different name in another language. For example, a foot remains a foot and performs the function of a foot, whether it is labeled a foot in English or un pied in French.

Additionally, foreign language learning is much more a cognitive problem solving activity than a linguistic activity, overall. Studies have shown repeatedly that foreign language learning increases critical thinking skills, creativity, and flexibility of mind in young children. Students who are learning a foreign language out-score their non-foreign language learning peers in the verbal and, surprisingly to some, the math sections of standardized tests. This relationship between foreign language study and increased mathematical skill development, particularly in the area of problem solving, points once again to the fact that second language learning is more of a cognitive than linguistic activity.
A 2007 study in Harwich, Massachusetts, showed that students who studied a foreign language in an articulated sequence outperformed their non-foreign language learning peers on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) test after two-three years and significantly outperformed them after seven-eight years on all MCAS subtests.

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

The notion of "earlier is better" in language learning seems to be upheld by the fact that longer sequences of foreign language instruction seem to lead to better academic achievement, overall. Because second language instruction provides young children with better cognitive flexibility and creative thinking skills, it can offer gifted students the intellectual and developmental challenges they need and desire.

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 7:40am

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Are you trying to say here that the learning of a second language in school is detrimental to literacy and the learning of English?

In Ireland, in this country, and in that period, the effect of the Revival was to reduce school attainment in English, and this was greatly to the detriment of the economically poorer and academically weaker sections of society. I don't know the relevant cases in other countries, and anyway, it is only in this country, Ireland, that I can attempt to hold the politicians to account.

On the legalities of the school policies, in 1965 the late professor John M. Kelly wrote:

"Now if I am right in suggesting that the State's right to compel the learning of Irish in the National School is perhaps less that 100% clear... the next question would be this: is it entitled to treach so much of it, at the expense - necessarily - of other subjects? Is it entitled to teach 25% more Irish than Arithmetic, twice as much as English, five times as much as History or Geography? It is entitled to prescribe that children at the National School should spend about one third of their precious, all too short years in primary education on this one subject, not to speak of the effort and time expended on the same subject when it is used as a medium of instruction on other subjects?"

Of course, the situation to-day is not so extreme. Nonetheless, in 2011, Ruairi Quinn linked the amount of time spent nowadays on Irish and Religion with illiteracy problems.

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 7:54am

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Are you trying to say here that the learning of a second language in school is detrimental to literacy and the learning of English? If that is correct then the standard of languages and literacy across Europe (not to mention the world) must be very poor, due to the sheer number who learn second languages at school.

I just want add here the thoughts of people a bit more familiar with the subject than Dev.
Cognitive benefits of learning a language.

When and where is the known reality of our situation in Ireland to be taken into account?

Irish has been taught throughout the education system for ninety years. It commences in infants' class. It, plus other additional languages are either essential or generally needed to get into our universities. So with all these experiences, can you point to some feature of our society and say: "Behold! these are the cognitive benefits accruing to us from this extensive language learning of ours!"

After all of that, we can't even staff the international call centres, for lack of competent speakers of other languages.

oldmangrub · 21-08-2012 7:59am

Interest in History wrote: »

"I would suggest that where a pupil learns Irish or any other subject solely as a consequence of compulsion, physical or psychological, this learning does not count as genuinely educative. This is because learning can be characterised as truly educative only where it is undertaken because of some intrinsic value found in the subject or activity in question.

Of course, Irish is not the only compulsory subject at primary level. And you're putting your own context onto this, much the same as you misrepresented the research of Reg Hindley in his book "The Death of the Irish Language." I'm sure he'd appreciate that. Kevin Williams is not arguing that Irish should not be compulsory, but that teachers should aim to demonstrate the "intrinsic value" in it. Something that "do your homework or you'll have to do Irish" etc doesn't nurture. Since Irish is a language, it has its own intrinsic value. I would argue that a four year old will understand that in spite of the fact that for ideological rather than pedagogical reasons, some adults might not.

Interest in History wrote: »

The politians are focused on their need to show that our independent state is "Not England". The Irish language provides them with a brand image that shows that. No politician actually believes that the population will adopt Irish as a vernacular and no politician cares, because the purpose of the brand image is served by Irish irrespective of anybody speaking it.

This is not at all what our politicians are focused on. At all. This is based on your own personal opinion of how other people think, stated as fact. The Irish language has lobby groups. Lobby groups have been responsible for the majority of reform in respect of Irish-speakers. Politicians do not, and will never give priority to a minority community. They're focused on votes. The position of the Irish language is protected because, however unwise you consider it, the majority of the Irish people support it at the moment. Votes. Not branding.

Interest in History wrote: »

As for using the education system: Eoin MacNeill, the first Minsister for Education, and Michael McDowell's ancestor, said: "you might as well be putting wooden legs on hens as trying to restore Irish through the school system". (Quoted in Joe Lee's "Ireland 1912 -1985"). But still he was willing to distort the whole education system for which he was responsible. Can there be a worse example of the cynical abuse of political power?

So, politician uses colourful expression to express how difficult something is, then manages to succeed in doing it anyway? Perhaps you can't think of a worse example of the cynical abuse of political power, but that really depends how you'd compare genocide, enforced starvation etc to teaching Irish.

Interest in History wrote: »

"There is no doubt that the child who, to-day, is doing Irish as well as English, has to a certain extent double the work, so far as reading and writing are concerned, and if you want to get that language in the same time you must necessarily fall short of what was done when there was only one language involved... We shall have to be satisfied with a less high standard in Engliskh. There is no other way for it."

Well: he got his way!

It's not 1936 anymore. Pedagogical research into language learning has moved on. It is widely accepted that bilingual teaching in schools enhances literacy and language acquisition. I believe this research is the stumbling block our conspiring pro-Irish politicians face in trying to reduce the amount of time Irish is taught in primary schools. It's why they failed to enforce a strategy of teaching English to junior infants in Gaelscoils (senior infants is the common practise).

Cú Giobach · 21-08-2012 8:02am

Interest in History wrote: »

Of course, the situation to-day is not so extreme. Nonetheless, in 2011, Ruairi Quinn linked the amount of time spent nowadays on Irish and Religion with illiteracy problems.

This topic has nothing to do with religion.

I have given you a link regarding the effects of learning a second language in school, you can either look into it or examine the results of numerous studies on this area by those learned in the subject or keep quoting politicians who have very little experience or knowledge in this regard, your choice.

The only subject I personally might listen to regarding, or question a politician about, is politics, (or more accurately, how to get votes).

oldmangrub · 21-08-2012 8:04am

Interest in History wrote: »

Irish has been taught throughout the education system for ninety years. It commences in infants' class. It, plus other additional languages are either essential or generally needed to get into our universities. So with all these experiences, can you point to some feature of our society and say: "Behold! these are the cognitive benefits accruing to us from this extensive language learning of ours!"

What "extensive language learning"? I think you need to re-read Dubhthach's post about the hours given to Irish. We've already gone into the problems faced in competing linguistically with continental countries. See my post #977. We should strive to compete, yes. The argument I thought had moved on to; how?

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 8:26am

oldmangrub wrote: »

.... ......And you're putting your own context onto this, much the same as you misrepresented the research of Reg Hindley in his book "The Death of the Irish Language." ..............

Can you show how I misrepresented the research of Reg Hindley? I think that it is fair that I should ask this of you and I think that in fairness you should respond.

Meanwhile, let me quote another passage from his book regarding old Eurpean elites having their own language. (Of course his book was written some time ago:)

"....It is interesting to reflect that the Dublin middle-class Gaeilgeoirí (professional Irish speakers) have in effect been attempting to revive and replicate such a situation, imposing Irish as an 'elite' language on a vast non-Irish speaking majority: but with the added eccentricity (cj. Latin in mediaeval Europe) that they do not even speak Irish as their native language themselves."

If you reject the references from Hindley, then here is Tom Garvin in "Preventing the Future" where he also addresses the matter of the political elite.

"The idea that Ireland's future lay with the revival of the irish language was an elite conviction after independence in 1922, an idea essentially derived form Gaelic League ideas. This was never an authentic or widely held populat belief. A quiet scepticism about the possibility or even desireability of linguistic revival accompanied a passive assent to the massive official attempt at revival spearheaded by the schools; if the elites wanted it, the non-elites must follow."

Interest in History · 21-08-2012 8:31am

oldmangrub wrote: »

What "extensive language learning"? I think you need to re-read Dubhthach's post about the hours given to Irish. We've already gone into the problems faced in competing linguistically with continental countries. See my post #977. We should strive to compete, yes. The argument I thought had moved on to; how?

Points taken.

I just want to make the point that the concrete realities in Ireland do not accord with the generalisations about learning languages that are being quoted.

Cú Giobach · 21-08-2012 8:36am

Interest in History wrote: »

Points taken.

I just want to make the point that the concrete realities in Ireland do not accord with the generalisations about learning languages that are being quoted.

You are making an assumption (language learning is responsible for poor levels of literacy and the standard of English, among other things) that has been shown to be incorrect, and basing your statement above on that assumption.

How to revive the Irish language.

Comments