Irish language?

PK2008

dlofnep wrote: »

No - I'm learning Irish, because I enjoy doing so. I like to be able to speak the indigenous language of this island, and feel proud at being able to do so. You cannot place a price on the journey of learning a language. I'm sure you don't attempt to quantify feelings such as happiness in other scenarios - like, when your daughter gets married - or when your son graduates from college. So why attempt to do so with the feelings that being able to speak your own language gives you?

Wow, I almost got weepy there, but this isnt about you or me, its about ploughing millions into a failed attempt to revive a language which has no modern relevance

dlofnep

PK2008 wrote: »

Wow, I almost got weepy there, but this isnt about you or me, its about ploughing millions into a failed attempt to revive a language which has no modern relevance

Of which I have advocated a revamp in the curriculum to address this. What have you advocated? Diluting the education to add more failure to it? And no - it isn't about your or me. I'm glad you said that - because the majority of the people appear to support the language. So why should you dictate what happens to it, against the wishes of the majority?

PK2008

PK2008 wrote: »

Wow, I almost got weepy there, but this isnt about you or me, its about ploughing millions into a failed attempt to revive a language which has no modern relevance

Peanuts in the grand scheme of things! It may not be as successful as many would like but it's not a failure either.

If it had failled there would be no Gaeiltacht anywhere!

PK2008

dlofnep wrote: »

Of which I have advocated a revamp in the curriculum to address this. What have you advocated? Diluting the education to add more failure to it?

I actually think making it optional would add to education. Those who wanted to study it would be surrounded by others who wanted to study and they would all be happy being free from distractions. Those who didnt want to study it would A) study a language they were actually interested in and not resent being forced to learn (and suck at) Irish

Everyones a winner

dlofnep

PK2008 wrote: »

I actually think making it optional would add to education. Those who wanted to study it would be surrounded by others who wanted to study and they would all be happy being free from distractions. Those who didnt want to study it would A) study a language they were actually interested in and not resent being forced to learn (and suck at) Irish

I'm not against you on that point in principle. But surely, you see that doing so with the current curriculum would be a disaster. Would you support the introduction of a conversational Irish class to address the poor "speaking" ability of students?

PK2008

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm not against you on that point in principle. But surely, you see that doing so with the current curriculum would be a disaster. Would you support the introduction of a conversational Irish class to address the poor "speaking" ability of students?

Disaster for who?

If it was optional, yeh

FoneMaster

Is maith liom Sharon Ni Bheolain. An bhfuil cead agam dul go dti an leithreas?:D

I.Am.A.Panda

Firstly, the poll on this thread is ambiguous and does not mean all the thing the Pro-Dev Irish users are implying. Secondly, it's a poll on Boards, not a census statistic.

Secondly, the constitution may state Irish is a language de jure, but the truth is we have more monolingual speakers that need to be catered for. The constiutuion also stated the Catholic Church had a special place and we owned the North once. But it was changed because it was out-dated, like the fact Irish is still considered the first language of the island.

Noreen1

PK2008 wrote: »

Again you missed the point; a foreign language is required, a foreign language of the persons choice. My point is that Irish should be among the choices as it is not required for the vast majority of disciplines. A foreign language in todays globalised world is a must, most college graduates will go to work in multi national organisations so it makes sense.

and no offense or anything but only the lower point university courses would accept a Grade D in maths and pretty much no graduate programme.

No offence taken. I was merely stating the minimum requirement for entry to thir level education.

I like Irish and I'm a somewhat competent speaker. I wish there were more people around who spoke it in normal conversation so I could practice; things like Seachtain na Gaeilge are too formal and regimented, and they feel more like awkward token gestures.

I think it is a mistake to believe that you can allow a language to flourish by throwing state funding at it and forcing everyone to learn it. Having it as a working language of the EU is just bizarre, but then again, it is the EU...

An official dialect, close association with the state and mandatory "teaching" (if you can even call it that) make an incredible number of people resent the language.

Dionysus

Deleted User wrote: »

An official dialect, close association with the state and mandatory "teaching" (if you can even call it that) make an incredible number of people resent the language.

English has an "official dialect", otherwise known as standard English. Most if not all languages which have states supporting them similarly have an "official dialect". Why is it suddenly such a bad thing in Ireland? Furthermore, all the major languages of the world are such because they have a "close association with the state". They had/have armies behind them. Not so long ago, for instance, over 50% of the population of modern-day France did not speak French as their first language. Similarly with English, obviously. Both these countries had policies which infamously enforced mandatory "teaching".

It seems odd that somebody would single out issues which have marked the evolution of all modern languages on earth as problematic when it comes to Irish.

Noreen1

I actually have some sympathy for those who don't want to learn Irish. However, it is inevitable that most students will resent having to learn one or more subjects.
It is also inevitable that some students will not require the core subjects to the level they are taught for leaving cert. in their chosen career.

I do not believe, however, that making all subjects optional is either practical, or even a good idea.

So, we are left with an education system that is designed to suit the broadest possible range of students.
It would certainly appear that a lot of parents want their children to learn Irish. (Hence the upsurge of Gaelscoileanna). That seems to me to be an acceptable reason to leave Irish as one of the core subjects.

Where I see room for improvement is in the entry requirements for Universities. Having any subject, which is not relevant to the chosen course, as an entry requirement, seems to me to have a detrimental effect on the educational prospects of a greater number of students than whether or not Irish should be optional for Leaving Cert.

Noreen

Dionysus

Dionysus wrote: »

English has an "official dialect", otherwise known as standard English.

Yeah. Funny though; last I heard, English isn't the lingua franca of the entire planet. There is no comparison between that and Irish.

Dionysus wrote:

Most if not all languages which have states supporting them similarly have an "official dialect". Why is it suddenly such a bad thing in Ireland? Furthermore, all the major languages of the world are such because they have a "close association with the state". They had/have armies behind them. Not so long ago, for instance, over 50% of the population of modern-day France did not speak French as their first language. Similarly with English, obviously. Both these countries had policies which infamously enforced mandatory "teaching".

I see. Let's keep flogging that dead horse, so, because it worked so well in France. Never mind the facts that we aren't France, barely anyone speaks Irish fluently and in the 90 years since independence, it has been clinging on for dear life. But you keep believing that mandatory classes, printing official documents and having the occasional token Dáil speech in Irish (which nobody can even understand) will revive it. :pac:

Dionysus wrote:

It seems odd that somebody would single out issues which have marked the evolution of all modern languages on earth as problematic when it comes to Irish.

In case you haven't noticed, state policy for who knows how long has done practically nothing to help the Irish language, and has more than likely achieved the opposite by making students everywhere feel bitter resentment towards it.

If Irish is revived, I bet you anything it will not be the government's doing. By abolishing what is essentially a detrimental state monopoly on Irish, it may have a chance.

The only thing that will carry a revival is an army of ordinary people who want to learn and speak it, and that will never happen so long as current policy is in place.

Dionysus

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah. Funny though; last I heard, English isn't the lingua franca of the entire planet.

Oddly enough, I've never heard that either. It would be a bit strange to think that even half, or even one-quarter, of the world's population of almost 7 billion people used English as their lingua franca. At any rate, what is your point in bringing up this red herring?

Deleted User wrote: »

barely anyone speaks Irish fluently

Is this what passes as a serious comment for you?

Deleted User wrote: »

In case you haven't noticed, state policy for who knows how long has done practically nothing to help the Irish language, and has more than likely achieved the opposite by making students everywhere feel bitter resentment towards it.

"Students everywhere"? Have you got evidence for this? And would they be the same students who love going to school everyday and who are beating the door down to get into every class but Irish? If so, you must have gone to a quite exceptional school.

Deleted User wrote: »

By abolishing what is essentially a detrimental state monopoly on Irish, it may have a chance.

What is this "state monopoly on Irish" that you are speaking about? And are you in favour of Irish students being forced to study maths and English, even though the vast majority of Irish people will never use calculus, English poetry or the like when they leave school?

lugha

Noreen1 wrote: »

It would certainly appear that a lot of parents want their children to learn Irish. (Hence the upsurge of Gaelscoileanna). That seems to me to be an acceptable reason to leave Irish as one of the core subjects.

With respect, that is not a reason at all. Allow Irish to be optional and you will have the ideal situation where those who want to study Irish will and those that don't won't. The insistence by some that Irish be compulsory gives the game away IMO. If Irish really was held in as much affection as they believe, then why not trust the people to make their own decisions?
My own view is that compulsory Irish in school is perversely, detrimental to the promotion of the language. There were many within the GAA who thought that allowing the extensive televising of games would be detrimental to that organisation. And they too, perversely, were wrong.

Noreen1

lugha wrote: »

With respect, that is not a reason at all. Allow Irish to be optional and you will have the ideal situation where those who want to study Irish will and those that don't won't. The insistence by some that Irish be compulsory gives the game away IMO. If Irish really was held in as much affection as they believe, then why not trust the people to make their own decisions?
My own view is that compulsory Irish in school is perversely, detrimental to the promotion of the language. There were many within the GAA who thought that allowing the extensive televising of games would be detrimental to that organisation. And they too, perversely, were wrong.

I tend to agree that Irish - as it was taught in schools - is detrimental to the language. I believe the Irish syllabus is pretty awful - but I support reform of the educational system, to International best practice standards, rather than making it optional.

If Irish is made optional, then some students will apply pressure for all subjects to be made optional - and that would be severely detrimental to our system of education.

Some underfunded schools will undoubtedly also stop teaching it, as has already happened with other subjects in some schools - and then it will no longer be optional for those who want to learn it.

I'm fortunate that I didn't have to go to school to learn Irish, nor did my children. I don't believe that those who didn't have the same opportunity to learn Irish should be denied it on the whim of any current Minister for Education regarding funding. Unfortunately, keeping Irish compulsory is the only way to ensure that those who wish to can continue to learn it.

We need to improve our system of education dramatically - but suggesting that Irish be made optional is akin to putting a bandaid on a festering wound - I think our children deserve better.

Noreen

Iwasfrozen

Noreen1 wrote: »

I tend to agree that Irish - as it was taught in schools - is detrimental to the language. I believe the Irish syllabus is pretty awful - but I support reform of the educational system, to International best practice standards, rather than making it optional.

If Irish is made optional, then some students will apply pressure for all subjects to be made optional - and that would be severely detrimental to our system of education.

Some underfunded schools will undoubtedly also stop teaching it, as has already happened with other subjects in some schools - and then it will no longer be optional for those who want to learn it.

I'm fortunate that I didn't have to go to school to learn Irish, nor did my children. I don't believe that those who didn't have the same opportunity to learn Irish should be denied it on the whim of any current Minister for Education regarding funding. Unfortunately, keeping Irish compulsory is the only way to ensure that those who wish to can continue to learn it.

We need to improve our system of education dramatically - but suggesting that Irish be made optional is akin to putting a bandaid on a festering wound - I think our children deserve better.

Noreen

The same can be said of any subject tough, why should children not be guarteed Biology, or French, or even Business Studies ?

Why should Irish take precedence before all other subjects ?

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why should Irish take precedence before all other subjects ?

Because the Government wishes to revive the language, and the people appear to support the revival of the language I would imagine.

We know why it has the status it has. You just aspire for it to be optional. I don't think asking the above question will solve anything to be honest

Unless we want to go around in circles for another 20 pages.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

Because the Government wishes to revive the language, and the people appear to support the revival of the language I would imagine.

But I would love to see some evidence on how far the people actually do support the revival of the language.

Granted they may send their children to an Irish school in the hope that they will do higher Irish in the LC but I would imagine their faces may turn sour when asked to take time out of their busy schedules to learn Irish themselves.

dlofnep wrote: »

We know why it has the status it has. You just aspire for it to be optional. I don't think asking the above question will solve anything to be honest

Maybe not, but God loves a chancer.

dlofnep wrote: »

Unless we want to go around in circles for another 20 pages.

Well I'd rather not...

I.Am.A.Panda

Noreen1 wrote: »

If Irish is made optional, then some students will apply pressure for all subjects to be made optional - and that would be severely detrimental to our system of education.

And what's the problem with that? They can take subjects according to the specific requirements per each College course they intend to take.

Noreen1 wrote: »

Some underfunded schools will undoubtedly also stop teaching it, as has already happened with other subjects in some schools - and then it will no longer be optional for those who want to learn it.

Then they can move to another school.

Noreen1 wrote: »

I'm fortunate that I didn't have to go to school to learn Irish, nor did my children. I don't believe that those who didn't have the same opportunity to learn Irish should be denied it on the whim of any current Minister for Education regarding funding. Unfortunately, keeping Irish compulsory is the only way to ensure that those who wish to can continue to learn it.

I agree, let's begin to apply that logic everywhere.

See, in my school an economics class sometimes won't go ahead. The solution? Make economics compulsory for everyone, ensuring that the minority get their subject. Apply the same for Music, Applied Maths, Art, etc.

Noreen1 wrote: »

We need to improve our system of education dramatically - but suggesting that Irish be made optional is akin to putting a bandaid on a festering wound - I think our children deserve better.

Right, by amputating the festering wound

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But I would love to see some evidence on how far the people actually do support the revival of the language.

Well, unless you want to conduct a nationwide survey - I don't think we can find out. I would estimate that the majority of people support it. I could be wrong - if you have anything that might suggest otherwise, drop me a link.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Granted they may send their children to an Irish school in the hope that they will do higher Irish in the LC but I would imagine their faces may turn sour when asked to take time out of their busy schedules to learn Irish themselves.

I don't feel that would be common practice.

but on a serious note - I've been trying to write an essay for the past 3 days, and I've only 300 words written. On the flip side, I've probably written two essays to you So, if it's ok with you - I'll bow out of this discussion and try get this done

I.Am.A.Panda

dlofnep wrote: »

Because the Government wishes to revive the language, and the people appear to support the revival of the language I would imagine.

We know why it has the status it has. You just aspire for it to be optional. I don't think asking the above question will solve anything to be honest

Unless we want to go around in circles for another 20 pages.

Why does Irish have the status it has?

Because 1,000 odd rebels stormed Dublin in 1916 and for their efforts were executed. As a result Irish nationalist extremists became widely supported. They later were elected in 1917 and fought a War for Independence between 1919 and 1921. Then, once the Free State was set up after Dev tried to be Mr.Popular and started a war which would later have no meanign when he became a Hypocrite, these radicals decided to make Irish compulsory.

People like Dev supported it's use. Why? because of the whole idea of National Identity. Then, as the Irish do, we became complacent and willign to follow tradition. It became okay to force generation after generation to forcibly learn Irish and for it to become saturated only through government funding in society. Now, these generations are in control, and of course realise the stupidity of the regime they went through, and naturally realise reform is needed, that there are very few monolingual speakers left, and more monolingual speakers of different languages that need to be, and ought to be catered for. That the language is slowly dying and that no matter what the government does, it can't keep it alive.

The only reason for keeping Irish alive is for some sense of national identity. Of course, our national identity is a long established one of Drinkers, Fighters, Shamrocks, Catholics and Farmers. For me, Irish embodies this hideous stereotype. English has meant 100's of MNC's have invested here. It mean we can easily contact most of the world, and our able to ride the back of an economic collosus known as the English speaking world.

When we were heavily focused on being 'Irish', were were backward and undeveloped. When we gave that up, we got the Celtic Tiger.

Dionysus

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

Why does Irish have the status it has?

Because 1,000 odd rebels stormed Dublin in 1916 and for their efforts were executed. As a result Irish nationalist extremists became widely supported.

You're revealing far too much political baggage there.

Dionysus

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

For me, Irish embodies this hideous stereotype.

That's quite clear, quite clear indeed.

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

English has meant 100's of MNC's have invested here. It mean we can easily contact most of the world, and our able to ride the back of an economic collosus known as the English speaking world.

Yes, I've noticed that myself how all the MNCs avoid countries that don't have English as their dominant language. Those poor Germans, French, Italians, Finns ....:rolleyes:

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

When we were heavily focused on being 'Irish', were were backward and undeveloped. When we gave that up, we got the Celtic Tiger.

You're not doing your argument any favours here.

Noreen1

Because 1,000 odd rebels stormed Dublin in 1916 and for their efforts were executed. As a result Irish nationalist extremists became widely supported.

I hate to disappoint you, but wanting to give people what I consider to be the basic right to speak their own language does not make anyone remotely resemble a "Nationalist Extremist". They use much more extreme methods of asserting their opinions.

When we were heavily focused on being 'Irish', were were backward and undeveloped. When we gave that up, we got the Celtic Tiger.

You mean the Celtic Tiger that helped bring the country to it's knees?
The same one that was based on lies and abysmal banking practices?

Noreen1

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

And what's the problem with that? They can take subjects according to the specific requirements per each College course they intend to take.

Unfortunately, they can't. Our schools don't have the necessary funding or resources to permit this. Even if the schools did have the necessary resources, Universities have entry requirements for English, Irish, Maths, and a foreign language - irrespective of the course requirements.

Then they can move to another school.

Unfortunately not, again. Schools have designated cachement areas, so you can't just have your child go to the school of your choice, unless you want to move house as well.
In addition, it is not uncommon in rural areas for secondary schools to be 30 miles apart. Two hours extra travelling time would affect the time spent studying other subjects more than the 30 minutes studying Irish, so would be self defeating.


The reality is that saying Irish and/or any other subject should be optional is overly simplistic.

If you can produce evidence that the majority of Irish people do not want their children to learn Irish, then I'd be very interested in reading it.

My personal experience is that people react very positively to hearing the language. I have often met people, who are not native speakers, who want to practice speaking Irish, or just love to hear it spoken.

So, we may as well agree to disagree.
Otherwise, this debate could continue endlessly.

Noreen

NTMK

I still don't see why it cant be optional you say it would be dropped because of funding. this hasn't happened for other optional subjects. the fact is if the language is as popular as you say it is then there shouldn't be a problem with it becoming optional. I would still keep it compulsory that a second language is taught

Personally I would of dropped it as i would have like to have focused on my german and other subjects more.

Intothesea

I.Am.A.Panda wrote: »

Because 1,000 odd rebels stormed Dublin in 1916 and for their efforts were executed. As a result Irish nationalist extremists became widely supported.

If a group of French freedom fighters stormed London's HQs to demand an independent French state, do you think English public opinion could ever be swayed to support? The mass of Irish people had an account to settle; a few hundred years of being subjugated and outlawed in your home country will tend to create the desire and necessitate waiting for the opportunity to overcome purposely-generated chaos in the situation so that it's possible to act as a single entity. The rebels managed this in a way they didn't predict :pac:

People like Dev supported it's use. Why? because of the whole idea of National Identity. Then, as the Irish do, we became complacent and willign to follow tradition. It became okay to force generation after generation to forcibly learn Irish and for it to become saturated only through government funding in society. Now, these generations are in control, and of course realise the stupidity of the regime they went through, and naturally realise reform is needed, that there are very few monolingual speakers left, and more monolingual speakers of different languages that need to be, and ought to be catered for. That the language is slowly dying and that no matter what the government does, it can't keep it alive.

I think it can be argued that the intentions of the original set-up were to keep Irish as part of an intellectual culture only. The results are unmistakable anyway. Lip-service teaching efforts indicate that Ireland's modern architects were as concerned with the economic/world-stage isolation of an all Irish-speaking Ireland as detractors are today. I can't understand why it isn't possible to encourage a bi-lingual society, but would be suprised if it wasn't related to the endlessly polarisable nature of our interrupted basic mentality.

The only reason for keeping Irish alive is for some sense of national identity. Of course, our national identity is a long established one of Drinkers, Fighters, Shamrocks, Catholics and Farmers. For me, Irish embodies this hideous stereotype. English has meant 100's of MNC's have invested here. It mean we can easily contact most of the world, and our able to ride the back of an economic collosus known as the English speaking world.

In my opinion, keeping Irish alive for the sake of bolstering Irish identity concepts is a very important endeavour. This is my (and the majority of peoples') cultural inheritance; no other language can approach the group-identity galvanising value of Irish. A little research will reveal our stereotypes to also be scholars, religious people, writers, poets and proud rebels; who, by and large, are people who look out for others. If the Irish language is responsible for drinking and fighting it can pick up the tab for these things as well

When we were heavily focused on being 'Irish', we were backward and undeveloped. When we gave that up, we got the Celtic Tiger.

In the aftermath of a long period of negation in our place, we clung to the only things that could remind us that we had a right to exist as an independent group with strong, cogent identity: religion and language. The Celtic Tiger is a reminder to us that a small group of people on a small island can only punch to a certain, relatively small weight. Given the maximum capabilities we can likely have in the material world it makes sense to keep a keen eye on the immaterial, I think.

eddyc

Intothesea wrote: »

If a group of French freedom fighters stormed London's HQs to demand an independent French state, do you think English public opinion could ever be swayed to support? The mass of Irish people had an account to settle; a few hundred years of being subjugated and outlawed in your home country will tend to create the desire and necessitate waiting for the opportunity to overcome purposely-generated chaos in the situation so that it's possible to act as a single entity. The rebels managed this in a way they didn't predict :pac:



I think it can be argued that the intentions of the original set-up were to keep Irish as part of an intellectual culture only. The results are unmistakable anyway. Lip-service teaching efforts indicate that Ireland's modern architects were as concerned with the economic/world-stage isolation of an all Irish-speaking Ireland as detractors are today. I can't understand why it isn't possible to encourage a bi-lingual society, but would be suprised if it wasn't related to the endlessly polarisable nature of our interrupted basic mentality.



In my opinion, keeping Irish alive for the sake of bolstering Irish identity concepts is a very important endeavour. This is my (and the majority of peoples') cultural inheritance; no other language can approach the group-identity galvanising value of Irish. A little research will reveal our stereotypes to also be scholars, religious people, writers, poets and proud rebels; who, by and large, are people who look out for others. If the Irish language is responsible for drinking and fighting it can pick up the tab for these things as well



In the aftermath of a long period of negation in our place, we clung to the only things that could remind us that we had a right to exist as an independent group with strong, cogent identity: religion and language. The Celtic Tiger is a reminder to us that a small group of people on a small island can only punch to a certain, relatively small weight. Given the maximum capabilities we can likely have in the material world it makes sense to keep a keen eye on the immaterial, I think.

You speak as if all Irish people are the same, some of us don't identify with Irish being part of our culture, the whole idea of a national culture is becoming increasingly irrelevant anyway with our ever more multicultural society. The fact is that in the modern world it is possible for somebody to have more in common culturally with someone from a different country than someone from down the road. Nationalism was necessary for the formation of the state but I think it does more harm than good now.

Noreen1

NTMK wrote: »

I still don't see why it cant be optional you say it would be dropped because of funding. this hasn't happened for other optional subjects. the fact is if the language is as popular as you say it is then there shouldn't be a problem with it becoming optional. I would still keep it compulsory that a second language is taught

Personally I would of dropped it as i would have like to have focused on my german and other subjects more.

This has happened for other subjects, and will continue to happen. For the first time in 35 years, German will not be offered as a subject to incoming first years in my local community school. The reason is the recent budgetary cutbacks in Education funding. Personally, I think it's dreadful that students are going to lose a valuable option - but that is the reality.
Other schools throughout the country will have lost the option of other subjects, because they have to reduce the number of teachers.

The theory that every subject is optional, with the exception of the core subjects, doesn't stand up to rational analysis, anyway.

The reality is that students are presented with a range of choices in first year. Typically, this involves choosing one of a block of three subjects, to facilitate timetabling. Any student can only select one of the three subjects - so their "options" are severely limited from day one, in any case.

The next hurdle is selecting subjects for Leaving cert.
Again, the choices are divided into blocks, typically being broken down into a choice of one subject in a block of four.(For schools with 600 - 800 students, approx.) It is impossible for any school to arrange these blocks to suit every student. eg. My son wants to study Engineering at third level. One of the blocks he is currently being offered forces him to choose between Engineering and Technical graphics - he wanted to study both. Another block offers Business, Home Ec., Art, or Geography. He didn't take the first three subjects, so his only choice is Geography - which he loathes with a passion.
He is just one example of how "optional" subject choices really are. There are many more students in the same position, re. their subject choices.
To add to this, these blocks may well change by September - and, ideally, students should not have to choose their senior cycle subjects before they have their junior cert. results in any case!

So, in reality, our "optional" subject choices can actually restrict our educational opportunities as much as they enhance them - adding Irish to the optional group just means that that there is one more subject that a potential 66% of our students may not get the opportunity to study.

Ideally, I would love to see every 12 year old, having chosen their careers, being able to avail of any subject of their choice. I'm reliably informed by the local career guidance teacher, though, that a significant percentage of 17 year olds have no idea what they want to study at third level - therefore timetabling at our secondary schools tends to be structured so that no student is restricted from third level education, in the course of their choice, by poor subject choices at the age of 15.

Maybe we should start discussing how many more subjects should be mandatory? Or how much damage is being done to Educational prospects by budgetary restrictions?

Noreen