Quinn: Schools spend too much time on religion and Irish

Canard

I don't think that comment was meant badly, araic. The fact of the matter is that people have varying abilities and all the poster meant was that it should be taken into account. I found myself held back a lot in French class because we had both HL and OL students in the class and not everyone in HL was at the same level of French, and on the reverse I found myself lost in HL maths because it's not my cup of tea. :P

Eramen

araic88 wrote: »

I'm confused - the teaching programme is muddled, and should have a better hierarchy but should also have more emphasis on all these other things?? Tbh, this sounds like our parents' council who was very determined the school's results would improve, yet squawked when the staff suggested skipping the Christmas plays this year as getting them ready takes so bloody long.

Without going into too much detail I would suggest a programme which covers the basics, an amalgamated Maths & English/Irish class for a foundation, combined with two technical disciplines (DIY, Art, Wood/Metalwork, Mechanics, self defense, basic care & medicine etc), and a couple of subjects that encourage abstract thinking, essential for critical/logical thought (advanced maths, philosophy, theology & religion, physics & natural sciences, anthropology etc), and maybe one of the humanities(history, geography, language, etc).

This is 5 or 6 classes, including two which invite manual appreciation of the individual, something which we sorely lack and even scorn at the moment.

I also believe that a project-based schooling environment will work better than a class-based one. Students will be freer, have clear goals, shortened 'lecture times' (more hands on and practical) be easily helped and observed by teachers and parents in this format.

araic88 wrote: »

I find your final paragraph really surprising. I hope you never have a child with a distinct lack of talent. I also can't really tell to what area of education you're referring to - almost all secondary schools do stream classes where possible/appropriate. Do you mean primary school children???

I spent a year of college studying abroad; for teaching practice I had a class of 10 year olds who the principal described as "the children who will grow up to work in shops, do manual labour and so on..." and another of the "bright" kids who were so competitive and stressed out. I don't know who I pitied more. Also, when I asked do children move up/down streams I was told it is possible to, but in reality it rarely happens.

Well what I mean is that these children must be helped to push in a direction that they can thrive in while not sidelining their entire future (which is happening with both the talented AND no so talented right now).

The problem has never been the huge variation of intelligence and talent between children and people like we seem to make it out to be today, but rather the huge gap in the rewards and conditions of the jobs/fields they will end up in because of how they are treated in early life, such as a manual worker gets significantly less for comparably valuable work as anon-manual. The problem is not the children, its the system of direction and economics at the end of the educational road. While I'm not for total equality, something that kills all personal growth and the spirit of competition, I am for a living reward/wage system at the end of education for the benefit of all people in one society. It makes sense, because it eliminates suffering.

araic88 wrote: »

In these regards I really prefer our system here. And didn't the results today suggest we're not doing so badly anyway?!!

And yes, I also think we didn't do too badly, but I know we are all capable of better, especially with the funds we pump into the education department. Perhaps it might even be a lot better to scrap it. Studies have shown that non-departmental/non-centralized education is equal or more effective. Oh, and cheaper.

byhookorbycrook

Alessandra wrote: »

Having worked in both systems, I can see that UK (as well as other countries ahead of us) offer a far more inclusive and well-rounded education overall.

UK primary system is so mired in ticking targets, it's hard to see how it is either inclusive or wellrounded.

Scanlas The 2nd

40 minutes a day learning a language for six months like linguaphone teaches languages and you won't be far off fluent. Certainly far more fluent than 14 YEARS learning Irish with our fukcing retarded methodology.

Cookie_Monster

gallag wrote: »

I think sport... should be scrapped and sports clubs on Saturdays and religion on Sundays if required. That way children will not be sent home with houres of homework destroying family time.

with the current obesity epidemic only set to get worse there should be far more sports and fitness taught in school, not less. Getting rid of perhaps the only actual exercise some kids get a week is crazy.

andreas_220D

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'd like Irish to be preserved but taught in a manner which will ensure fluency among students. How do the Germans and Dutch teach English so effectively? A decent percentage of their populations are either fluent or have a good command of the English language.

I'm a German and I think that the Germans and Dutch learn the English language so easily is because of the fact that these three languages have the same roots. In the countryside were I grew up most people speak what's called "Plattdeutsch" (Lower German) which sounds similar to the dutch language. And those who speak German know that there are so many similar words in English/German/Dutch. Just to give you an example

English: what shall I do?
German: was soll Ich tun?
Plattdeutsch: wat shal ik don?
Dutch: wat zul ik doen?

I think you get the point.

Now the same little sentence in Irish "cad ba chóir dom a dhéanamh?" (Don't know if that's correct, just used Google translator). Well, for me that sounds like Klingon. Now guess what's easier to learn for us Germans?

BrokenArrows

MadsL wrote: »

Because no-one wants to study world religions at an academic level?? Wut?
Should we also exclude History from the exams as it is too subjective?

If someone wants to then by all means they can do it in 3rd level.

At primary/secondary it shouldn't take away study time from other subjects.

Canard

I actually thought about that earlier in the week, but how would anyone ever realize history etc interests them if not through school?
While it's pretty obvious that there's some imbalance in the priorities of the education system, turning it into a maths and science fest wouldn't do any good. If you take away history you've to remove geography, art and all those other "pointless" subjects, it'd be very bland without them though.

somairle

I dont think religion should be taught in any public schools, it's significance should be taught as part of history. I think the significance of the Irish language in Irish history should also be taught as part of the history class. Or perhaps a new Culture class encompassing the arts, the language and the influence of religion on Irish culture amoung other things. Irish should be optional, I love the language but there is no practical reason except romantic Gaelic notions, as long as the significance of it is taught in history/ culture I think it should be up to the child if they want to learn to speak it.

I don't think education should be soley about producing children off a conveyor belt for employment, education should also be about helping a person reach their potential and this is why art, sports etc are also as important as maths & science although I do agree we need more focus on those.

MadsL

Given the fiscal disaster that has been driven by financial illiteracy over the past years, then it is madness that there is no basic personal finance taught in schools.

Lesson 1
Why rent is not "dead money"

Lesson 2
Why a house doesn't actually cost what the selling price was.

Lesson 3
Why a house is generally a liability not an asset.

Lesson 4
Why a "pre-approved" credit card leaflet should be thrown in the bin.

You get the picture...

Chavways

Irish should be optional after Junior Cert and Religion of any kind should be abolished completely from primary school. Its okay as a Leaving Cert subject as it focuses on many different religions and their teachings but in primary school its complete joke.

I remember we had to learn stupid stories from the Bible off by heart, we had to be seen going to mass every weekend before our confirmation and we had to sing songs. And this was only 7 years ago.

I'm now in my first year of doing a physics degree trying to forget all of the useless Irish and Religion I've learn in my 14 years in school. What I would've given to actually be learning how the universe works instead of why Bean changes to Mná in plural.

oppenheimer1

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I disagree, our schools do not spend too much time on Religion and Irish, they spend too much time on holidays.

GaryIrv93

I don't think either subject deserves such a place in our education system. Religion for me was more of a 40 minute doss class than anything else where I could have a break, chat to friends or do homework in, and apart from the odd time in first year, I don't remember ever being given written work. Never paid any real attention to the subject either. As for Irish, probably the next biggest waste of school time. Every second of it was a ridiculous waste in the end due to its dull teaching, and irrelevance in general. It was a class we all hated having to go to and I as well as most left school without a word of it after 14 years. Having it compulsory all those years and not to gain anything from it is just a criminal waste of time and money outright. I say either teach the bloody language right, or remove it as a compulsory subject from first year onwards, leaving those who've shown interest in it to continue learning it, others the choice to study something else. Suits everyone that way. Better yet, though this probably won't happen, it could be removed completely, saving the State €1 Billion a year.

somefeen

Teaching religion would be valuable if it consisted of teaching kids about different cultures and belief systems.
This communion and confirmation stuff is like something out of a backwards country.

I remember when I was in school, my parents weren't catholic. I was the only child in the whole school that wasn't catholic.
Spent far too much time, helping teachers put up decorations, cleaning, and helping younger kids with reading while everyone else was learning prayers.
They could have taught me something useful instead.

LoonyLovegood

I wish I had better Irish. I can't fault my leaving cert teachers, who made me actually love the language, but it was the rote learning beforehand that made me hate it. I almost failed honours Irish in my leaving, if I had I wouldn't have gotten into college because it's a mandatory requirement in most NUI courses.

My name is URL wrote: »

Is it still the case that students can obtain higher points in their Leaving Cert if they take Irish exam papers? I never really understood that one. Why should anyone's education be worth more than others just because they completed a few exams in the native language? That's something that should be done away with right now if it hasn't been already.

I did this, got a higher grade in French than I should have. Without it I wouldn't be in the course I'm in now.

Mardy Bum

Philosophy should be taught from a young age.

Irish should be taught up until secondary and then it should be mandatory.

Dave!

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Why do people think that being on a phone excuses spelling and grammar mistakes?

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Religion should be thought as a generic topic covering all major religions and not a Catholic class. It should be a class so kids understand the belief systems of the world. It shouldn't be an exam subject. It should certainly take up less time than other subjects.

Irish should be thought up to J Cert but be an optional choice for leaving certificate.

Srsly?

who the fug

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'd like Irish to be preserved but taught in a manner which will ensure fluency among students. How do the Germans and Dutch teach English so effectively? A decent percentage of their populations are either fluent or have a good command of the English language.

Exactly , only bits I know after 12 years are words my mother used, yet my Italian and French flatmates with a perfect command of English

After the inter it should be optional, if you can't make a child love the language in 10 years no point beating a dead horse for another two.

Religion has no place in a state funded education system IMHO view but if the majority wish it to be taught then fine but not at present levels

BizzyC

I wouldn't mind Religion in school if it were more Theologically focused, ie teaching the backgrounds of various religions, their beliefs and methods of practice. It would be useful for building tolerance of other peoples beliefs.

But in Ireland "Religion" class is in fact Catholicism.

If parents want their children to be Catholic, fair enough bring them to church on a Sunday.
Rather than allowing children to opt-out of religious studies in school, it should be handled entirely on an opt-in basis with it only being taught to children who's parents request it.


As for Irish, I still want it to be taught but I think they go about it wrong.
I did higher level for the LC because I was fluent in the language, none of my classmates were and everyone else in my school did ordinary level.
If you dont command good conversational use of the language then 90% of stuff covered in literature is going to be lost on you.

Instead of teaching it the same way as English is taught with requirements for essays, poetry, books etc, teach it like German and French.
Get people speaking the language before you start asking them to derive the author's underlying message in a poem...

BrokenArrows

Dave! wrote: »

Srsly?

I didn't say my grammar was perfect and didn't say it was because of my phone.

Also can you correct that sentence because I don't see what's wrong with it.

who the fug

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Also can you correct that sentence because I don't see what's wrong with it.

Homophone

swimming in a sea

its a myth that irish is compulsory for the LC, I gave it up after the junior cert and went to university, giving it gave me a lot more time to study real subjects

Lelantos

BrokenArrows wrote: »

I didn't say my grammar was perfect and didn't say it was because of my phone.

Also can you correct that sentence because I don't see what's wrong with it.

You used thought instead of taught, he was pointing out if you're correcting spelling make sure your own is spot on.

TheDoc

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Considering the main entrance block for new teachers is acquiring the relevant grading in Irish, this will most likely lower the barrier of entry to becoming a teacher, increasing the workforce, and forcing a reduction in salary and OTT benefits.

While yeah it is going to be tough for existing teachers (My sister is a teacher as is my auntie, so the pain will hit home) it will create larger supply for what is a growing demand.

And this equals a win.

My personal opinion is Irish is dead weight. Should be an optional subject and not mandatory. I appreciate the national pride alot of people will have of the language, but it is a major disadvantage to the average student. It is a difficult language and most students see it as a waste of time and effort when its something they do not value. Having to proportion study hours to this subject is ridiculous.

The same for Religion, didnt that become an exam subject? Utterly retarded.

Religion again should be an optional subject, and for it to be a study of Theology in general. If left mandatory it should change its material base to educate about the history of religion, and all religions, and not stuff Catholic religion down students throats. A study on the history and believes of various religions will no doubt inform students early of the various beliefs, especially in a country that is becoming more and more diverse.

Its 2012, Religion and Christianity isn't a staple in Ireland, nevermind the globe, anymore. Where my parents generation found it weird if someone didnt go to church, my generation find it weird if someone does. Religion is a belief, and your belief, therefore you should be left to choose to take the subject or not.

I made a very mature and amicable agreement with my secondary school that during Religion class I would sit in the canteen and do homework and study. I say amicable, I say mature, it was pretty much to stop me being disruptive by calling "bollox" to everything we were reading in our Religion book.

token101

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Philosophy should be taught from a young age.

In place of religion you'd have another pointless subject? How many professional philosophers are there in Ireland? We'd be better off teaching soccer, you'd probably have more chance of making a living in that!

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Irish should be taught up until secondary and then it should be mandatory.

Do you mean mandatory after secondary level? You mean teach third level through Irish?

Shenshen

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'd like Irish to be preserved but taught in a manner which will ensure fluency among students. How do the Germans and Dutch teach English so effectively? A decent percentage of their populations are either fluent or have a good command of the English language.

They can practice it.
When I started to learn English, the teacher would speak English and require replies in English, non-English was being ignored during lesson.
We got to watch English telly (recorded on video, it was the 1980s after all), we listened to English radio, we read English books and newspapers. We would be asked to do presentations on various subjects (from Shakespeare's plays, the fall of the Berlin wall, Clinton's inaugurational address, the discovery of the structure of the DNA to the Loch Ness monster)
Later on, we went on class trips to England.

All the while, what we learned mostly was the English was a language spoken by millions of people, so learning it would enable us to communicate with them.
And I think that it's that particular bit of knowledge that was quite a motivator. Irish doesn't have that. There isn't a person alive who can communicate only in Irish...

Carlos_Ray

TheDoc wrote: »

Considering the main entrance block for new teachers is acquiring the relevant grading in Irish, this will most likely lower the barrier of entry to becoming a teacher, increasing the workforce, and
forcing a reduction in salary and OTT benefits.

While yeah it is going to be tough for existing teachers (My sister is a teacher as is my auntie, so the pain will hit home) it will create larger supply for what is a growing demand.

And this equals a win.

Complete rubbish. Irish is not a stumbling block for potential teachers. In fact, it separates the wheat from the chaff. I know numerous people that wanted to become teachers and had no Irish. What did they do? They learned the language and by doing so proved how much they really wanted to teach by making the effort and sacrifice. Anyone who wants to become a teacher but uses the excuse that they don't have honours Irish, is just highlighting the fact that they are not really bothered enough to make a sacrifice for the career.

Furthermore, there is not a "demand" for teachers at the moment. There are hundreds of qualified teachers moving abroad and surviving on substitute work.

OTT benefits? Typical tripe from those jealous of teachers. For the time they spend in college they get paid far less then those of equal qualifications in other sectors. If you reduce their holidays, you can expect to double their wages.

I'm not a teacher, but I've experienced the great work and sacrifices they make for pathetic salaries. Teachers that spend hours after school preparing classes, facilitating student events, coaching. Its a difficult job especially when you have to deal with moronic parents who believe that they have all the answers. Teachers tend to get a hard time on boards.ie, but thankfully Boards.ie is not representative of the majority if the population. It's merely a window into the life of many teenagers and unsatisfied office workers.

Anyway getting back to the point. Should Irish be taught in schools? Yes of course it should. Teaching a child any language is good for their development. Many fluent Irish speakers find it easier to pick up foreign languages. In addition to this, it's the native language. I know its not spoken outside of the country but that's irrelevant. That fact doesn't stop the Scandinavians speaking their languages. Why not just do away with all languages.... Afterall everybody understands English:rolleyes:

I find it hilarious that the common argument in Ireland against Irish is, " well why don't we learn something useful like French?" The fact is they have the opportunity to learn these languages too, but guess what.... 99% don't. They don't learn any language because they are lazy. The fact that Irish is not widely used gives them an excuse... " We'll it's not really useful so I never bothered learning it." Yeah right..... sounds too much like hard work.

As for religion. The fact that the vast majority of people in the world follow a religion of some kind suggests that children should be taught about them. Anyone who thinks that children spend day after day studying the bible in school is ignorant of the education system. Should a lot of time be spent on it? Of course not. But it cannot simply be ignored.

token101

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

If you reduce their holidays, you can expect to double their wages.

I thought this was bad, until I read this:

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Boards.ie is not representative of the majority if the population. It's merely a window into the life of many teenagers and unsatisfied office workers.

Then you lost any credibility so I just stopped reading.

LordSutch

slarkin123 wrote: »

Irish on the other hand i feel should stay. Its part of our culture and it would be sad to lose it. My dilemma when sending my first child to school was i wanted them to be fluent in their own language but every Irish school had a catholic ethos.

I understand your wish for your kids to be fluent in Irish, but here's an interesting backdrop to the debate, with a bit of help from the History Forum: "Interestingly Irish replaced Science as a primary school subject as recently as the 1920s. DeValera's aim was to make all the children of Ireland speak Irish, and to become more Irish and less 'worldly' > Science it seems was a bit too worldly and free thinking for the new state to handle at that time".

Click on 25 mins, 30 seconds > > >http://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10088625%3A1475%3A25-11-2012%3A

Carlos_Ray

token101 wrote: »

I thought this was bad, until I read this:



Then you lost any credibility so I just stopped reading.

Oh no.... please read on.... I crave validation from you.:pac: