How would you rejig the education system of Ireland?

BARKING UP_THE WRONG TREE!

Sorry if this has been done before, but having completed Primary and Secondary school in full (well, most of you anyway) .. what would you change ??

Primary School:

Keep Maths but change the way it is taught, start tables from a younger age, AL multiplication, addition and Subtraction and Division should be covered by the time the child reaches the end of first class as well as long multiplication and division. Basic algebra and trigonometry with some probability should be attained when one finished sixth class.

English: Not much to change there.

Irish: If you want to keep it, start form scratch in Junior Infants with proper conversational Irish and don't start teaching with past tense using stories which seems to be the norm in Ireland. (have the option of a European language for those pupils whose parents opt for it, this language part will be taught in a separate classroom then). It would be possible to integrate both Irish AND a foreign language by making the speaking of Irish compulsory for 3 of the 8 years in Primary school or something similar.)

Religion: Abolish.

Science: Introduce it and do more. Teach Physics, Chemistry and Biology (I am 22, left Primary school in 2003 and covered little or no science)

History: Grand, though should be more thorough

Geography: Not enough politics taught.

PE: Grand the way it is.

Art: No opinion really

Secondary:

Irish: If you have studied it in primary and wish to continue, then it will continue on as normal as I outlined in Primary. If you want to start from scratch then there will be an option for this in a separate class. None of that poetry or prose bollox. That only incites further hatred of the language / subject and does NOTHING for the revival. If you want to continue to study at senior level, then there should be two tiers, one for pure language, one for literature and language.

Foreign languages, German, French etc: teachers abilities should be better vetted and there should be no studying of a film or book in LC. Again, this should be an option. There are some of us who want to learn the language as a means of translation or conversing for business purposes, buusiness and beaurocracy meetings wont give a shyte if you can quote a French poet.

Maths: long list of reforms needed there, more probability and calculus and differentiation and applied maths needed, less algebra.

English: Can't see it's use After JC.

Geography: Not enough politics:

CSPE: LOL, too much crap. All about leaarning about discrimination against travellers and Advantages (and no disadvantages of EU etc) :P

sorry for th elong post. What do you feel needs reformed?

Mario95

This is a great idea. Its interesting to see what other people's options on today's education system are.
I totally agree with you on most of what you have there.
In my opinion the teaching method of every subject should be changed from memorization/rote learning to pure understanding. I mean why learn facts when they could be Googled in few seconds. The understanding of WHY something is and not WHAT something is should be tested.

Secondary:
Irish - Should be made an option, why force people to learn it?

English - Should be made an option (for L.C.) and renamed to Literature.

Home Economic - Should be completely removed. The only use of this subject is to create jobs for even more Home Economics teachers. It doesn't teach you anything which could be useful in real life, and is purely based on rote learning.

Maths - More time need to be spent on this subject and it should cover a much wider set of topics (most people in my class don't even know what vectors are!). Another 'level' would also be nice, because let's face it, H.L. maths is ridiculously easy. Again needs more focus on explaining why things are, for example most of my Maths class doesn't know why integrating a function gives the area. They are just given a formula and they are perfectly happy with with it. They go to a test not knowing what they are doing, and they still get an A.

Sciences - Less focus on experiments, more focus on theory, especially in chemistry. Would also like to see new stuff like quarks being put into the syllabus. Mechanics should make up a much bigger section of Physics.

Computer Science should be added, at least as an option for JC/LC.

Homework/Study time need to be at least halved. Students spend +30 hours in school and are expected to do +4 more hours of study/homework at home. Seriously... +60 hours a week is ridiculous. The number of subjects taught should be greatly reduced.


Primary:
Teaching Science, definitely. Introducing children to Maths earlier on and having it more in a form of puzzles instead of straightforward questions to teach them problem-solving skills. Irish should be removed.

spurious

They already teach Science in Primary do they not? Under SESE?
http://www.curriculumonline.ie/en/Primary_School_Curriculum/Social_Environmental_and_Scientific_Education_SESE_/Science/

To improve things, I would amalgamate small second-level schools within the one town or area and offer the full range of subjects at all levels to everyone in every school. Level the playing field.
Do away with the 'that's a better school than that' nonsense.

thehouses

Not all kids are suitable for mainstream education and will hold others back. I would have many of these out of school earlier learning a trade/apprenticeship.

EuropeanSon

Primary:
Everybody should learn basic probability and statistics. There is absolutely no reason everyone in the country shouldn't understand the gambler's fallacy and other basic probabilistic/numeracy concepts.

Foreign languages should be taught at an earlier age.


Secondary:
Mandatory subjects should be Maths, English, Science, History, a foreign language, Geography.

Possibly a basic CS or coding course should be added for JC/LC (optional)

EuropeanSon

Mario95 wrote: »

Secondary:
English - Should be made an option (for L.C.) and renamed to Literature. Absolutely disagree. Being able to creatively express yourself and compose readable pieces of prose are vital life skills for many.

Home Economic - Should be completely removed. The only use of this subject is to create jobs for even more Home Economics teachers. It doesn't teach you anything which could be useful in real life, and is purely based on rote learning.Nonsense. Cooking is a vital skill. It would be vastly more beneficial if the whole country knew how to cook and about basic nutrition than if they knew what a vector is.

Maths - More time need to be spent on this subject and it should cover a much wider set of topics (most people in my class don't even know what vectors are!). Another 'level' would also be nice, because let's face it, H.L. maths is ridiculously easy. Again needs more focus on explaining why things are, for example most of my Maths class doesn't know why integrating a function gives the area. They are just given a formula and they are perfectly happy with with it. They go to a test not knowing what they are doing, and they still get an A.Nobody really needs to know what a vector is. This is arrogant "look at me and how much better than my class I am" drivel. I am a Mathematics student, and found LC Maths very easy, but to suggest that just because I found it easy the course isn't adequate is silly. There are Olympiad programmes and third level courses for those who wish to expand their knowledge further, and that is adequate.

Sciences - Less focus on experiments, more focus on theory, especially in chemistry. Would also like to see new stuff like quarks being put into the syllabus. Mechanics should make up a much bigger section of Physics. Why? There's already a mechanics course (App Maths). Experiments are vital for stimulating interest in science courses. And any real particle physics will be a million miles over the head of everyone in LC

Homework/Study time need to be at least halved. Students spend +30 hours in school and are expected to do +4 more hours of study/homework at home. Seriously... +60 hours a week is ridiculous. The number of subjects taught should be greatly reduced. Methinks that's just you doing 60 hours a week. I doubt I did more than 35 once until maybe 6 weeks prior to exams.

The question I thought was meant to be how would you improve the system, not change it to just include the things you want to do.:rolleyes:

Mario95

EuropeanSon wrote: »

The question I thought was meant to be how would you improve the system, not change it to just include the things you want to do.:rolleyes:

Ooh come on, it would surely improve the system by a lot, at least for the vast morality of students.

Absolutely disagree. Being able to creatively express yourself and compose readable pieces of prose are vital life skills for many.

Yes, being able to creatively express yourself is a vital skill for many, that's what is being taught at J.C level. BUT I haven't seen many people having to write personal responses to poems or write about cultural context of books, outside of school. There really is not much need to keep it compulsory.

Nonsense. Cooking is a vital skill. It would be vastly more beneficial if the whole country knew how to cook and about basic nutrition than if they knew what a vector is.

Nonsense. At L.C. Home Ec. teaches students no cooking skills. At J.C. it teaches you at most the 'only proper' way of chopping vegetables, which i think its ridiculous and it doesn't add much to student's previous knowledge. The 'nutrition' part is really short and basic. It could easily be contained as a small part of the food section in Biology, if there really was the need for that.

Nobody really needs to know what a vector is. This is arrogant "look at me and how much better than my class I am" drivel. I am a Mathematics student, and found LC Maths very easy, but to suggest that just because I found it easy the course isn't adequate is silly. There are Olympiad programmes and third level courses for those who wish to expand their knowledge further, and that is adequate.

This is very arrogant. In the same way "nobody" needs to be able to creatively express themselves, only that vectors have a practical use, and the great majority of HL Maths students are going to do STEM related subjects in college.

Why? There's already a mechanics course (App Maths). Experiments are vital for stimulating interest in science courses.

I really don't know where you got his from. I am not sure what purpose the experiments serve, but writing up an A4 page + a diagram on each is nothing pleasant or stimulating people's interest in science.

And any real particle physics will be a million miles over the head of everyone in LC

Particle physics already exist as an optional part of Physics... I am obviously not talking about introducing advanced quantum mechanics, I am just saying that it would be nice to expand it a bit and to see the Chemistry syllabus being updated to include at least quarks.

Methinks that's just you doing 60 hours a week. I doubt I did more than 35 once until maybe 6 weeks prior to exams.

I am not using myself as an example. I am not spending any time outside of school for school work (except English essays), if you really need to know. I am using figures of what the students are advised to follow if they 'want to reach their full potential'. These were given by the principal and by many other teachers. Yes, some people need to spend less time in order to achieve good grades, but it is not fair on the majority who are doing their 60 or 35 (like you mentioned above) hours of study per week.

dalta5billion

Hey guys, some thoughts.

Absolutely agree with teaching the understanding of things rather than learning off.

Project Maths is a step in the right direction, but textbooks are still full of intimidating lists of questions. I'd like if basic comp. sci algorithms were taught as applications of maths. (E.g. bisection search)

Languages: Modern languages should be taught with a lot more emphasis on situation and culture. Mechanics of learning a language should be taught. (Origins of a word, etc.) Irish needs to be brought back down to real life like French/German. Emphasis on oral. Higher students can discuss actual current events as gaeilge. Like the Arab Spring/a recent news event during the oral. Lower students should be able to conduct basic business as gaeilge.

English: Make literature an optional subject. Add a mandatory subject which should teach communication and expression. I'd like to see aspects of CSPE and Religion integrated. Possible mock interview for job. Write essays and give speeches on things that interest you.

I really like lecture formats. I feel if no one looks after me I work harder.

Moody_mona

Contrary to opinions here, I don't think Science should be taught in depth at primary level. I get students in first year who have serious misconceptions about science because they were taught by someone who doesn't have an understanding, and may not have touched a science subject in secondary school as it's not a primary teacher requirement. The primary syllabus is overloaded, and I feel it needs to focus on basics in numeracy and literacy (tables, spellings, grammar, personal writing, money, maths around us) and leave the specialising until students are in second level.

randylonghorn

By all means, lets discuss ... but preferably without getting into one-on-one point-scoring, thanks.

spurious wrote: »

To improve things, I would amalgamate small second-level schools within the one town or area and offer the full range of subjects at all levels to everyone in every school. Level the playing field.
Do away with the 'that's a better school than that' nonsense.

I would agree wholeheartedly up to a point .... e.g 3 schools with a total student number of about 400-450 in one small town I'm thinking of is crazy.

I think there can be an optimum size though, and amalgamation beyond that isn't always a good thing. Again, I have an example in the back of my mind ... two good schools in one area, both around the 4-500 mark, amalgamated a few years back. In fairness, while there were no real subject choice issues, both would have needed building / renovation work, so the decision was to amalgamate ... do a major job on the one with plenty of space around it. One can see the logic.

Result though is a school which is hitting around 900, discipline problems have escalated a lot, neither staff nor students have any great sense of ownership or belonging, certain amount of friction between students and even between staff (despite the fact that both schools actually co-operated very well as separate entities), and tbh a general sense among teachers / students / parents / locals that it was a bad idea.

spurious

I don't think they should all be on the one premises, they could be run in the existing centres (and arguably with the existing names, if people were precious about things) but from an allocation and numbers point of view they would be one entity so that the full range of subjects could be offered and covered. In many towns I'm thinking of, the existing schools are within walking distance of each other, sometimes even adjoining premises.

I agree there is a size beyond which things get unwieldy, especially in the one building. There could be 'up to JC' sections and 'post-JC', again not separate schools (for allocation and funding purposes), though possibly in separate buildings/locations.

Anyway, it seems it's far more important to have or not have a uniform, so we'd better let the experts in the Department continue their path of 'improvements'.

cathalio11

I disagree with your post, Mario95.

I think the changes you have suggested are basically fitted to people with your aptitude and not the whole of Ireland.
Like you, Maths would be my strong point and I enjoy subjects like Physics and Applied Maths and struggle with languages. But because you have a particular disinterest in the arts and English as a subject, doesn't mean it should be taken away from everyone.

Also, I'd love if homework was less. I don't do mine unless I know there will be trouble if I don't. Not because I am an inefficient student but because I focus on what I need to study instead.
But you have to understand that the majority of the people do very little study before the heat starts to kick in and giving homework keeps them going to a great extent.

I respect your strengths in school and admire you for it, but I think you lack an appreciation for several aspects of life outside of your strengths.

EuropeanSon

Mario95 wrote: »

Ooh come on, it would surely improve the system by a lot, at least for the vast morality of students.No. I assume you meant majority, and no it certainly wouldn't.


Yes, being able to creatively express yourself is a vital skill for many, that's what is being taught at J.C level. BUT I haven't seen many people having to write personal responses to poems or write about cultural context of books, outside of school. There really is not much need to keep it compulsory. You are confusing the means of instruction with the skills taught, evidently.


Nonsense. At L.C. Home Ec. teaches students no cooking skills. At J.C. it teaches you at most the 'only proper' way of chopping vegetables, which i think its ridiculous and it doesn't add much to student's previous knowledge. The 'nutrition' part is really short and basic. It could easily be contained as a small part of the food section in Biology, if there really was the need for that.
Then change the course for it, don't just remove it because you don't think it's interesting. I am not very well read on the Home Ec course, but I highly doubt that nothing of practical use is taught.

This is very arrogant. In the same way "nobody" needs to be able to creatively express themselves, only that vectors have a practical use, and the great majority of HL Maths students are going to do STEM related subjects in college.They are not. Most people I know in TCD would have done HL Maths, and only half of those are STEM students. Also, Health Science students don't need to know anything about vectors AFAIK, and almost all Med students would have done HL maths. In addition, there is no real difficulty in introducing vectors at third level. Telling someone "this is what a vector is" serves no purpose anyway, other than as a box-ticking exercise.
I fail to see any arrogance on my part.


I really don't know where you got his from. I am not sure what purpose the experiments serve, but writing up an A4 page + a diagram on each is nothing pleasant or stimulating people's interest in science.
That wasn't the point you made. You said fewer experiments, not "less writing up of experiments". If you cannot see why experiments are important, words fail me.

Particle physics already exist as an optional part of Physics... I am obviously not talking about introducing advanced quantum mechanics, I am just saying that it would be nice to expand it a bit and to see the Chemistry syllabus being updated to include at least quarks.
It's already on the Physics course, and so adding it to the chem course would be somewhat redundant.


I am not using myself as an example. I am not spending any time outside of school for school work (except English essays), if you really need to know. I am using figures of what the students are advised to follow if they 'want to reach their full potential'. These were given by the principal and by many other teachers. Yes, some people need to spend less time in order to achieve good grades, but it is not fair on the majority who are doing their 60 or 35 (like you mentioned above) hours of study per week.I doubt anyone in the country follows those guidelines, so your use of them is pointless. "The majority" is nonsense.

.

yoho139

EuropeanSon wrote: »

Particle physics already exist as an optional part of Physics... I am obviously not talking about introducing advanced quantum mechanics, I am just saying that it would be nice to expand it a bit and to see the Chemistry syllabus being updated to include at least quarks.
It's already on the Physics course, and so adding it to the chem course would be somewhat redundant.

Not everyone does both. I wouldn't be so concerned about redundancy either way.

Damo810

Get rid of the unnecessaries. CPSE/LVCP are only there for points and a waste of time,imo. Get rid of religion and make Irish optional. split the English in 2, with your Shakespeare and poetry becoming drama.

Make it more about learning and preparing you for the rest of your career rather than learning off reams of information (i'm looking at you sráith). With the spare time gotten from stopping the religion/LCVP and the rejig of the english course you could bring in new things, technology is only getting bigger and use of computers and tech will be far more vital in life than quoting 400 year old english that doesn't get applied in todays world. Computer programming, at least a basic knowledge could be introduced.

Could go through each subject, but you get the basic jist of things.

MightyMandarin

Adopt a system more like Germany i.e shorter school days, longer school year. Most work to be done in class with minimal homework. Also the Abitur (Leaving Cert) is spread out throughout 6th year e.g geography exam might be in November, english could be in April.

Irish probably should be a choice subject and definitely more emphasis should be put on foreign languages in primary school. Maybe make 2 languages compulsory in secondary with Irish being an option for that.

richardh330

Music:
Set works:
There's more poems on the English course that set works on the music course. There should be more set works firstly from each an every era (Baroque, Classical, Romantic, Late Romantic, 20th century and Contemporary) (Popular as well). There should be a choice on the paper of what set works you can do. Questions for set works can be very vague, and the marking scheme even vaguer. For example "Name and explain the texture in the excerpt." Marking Scheme => "Suitable explanation of texture."
What's up with that?? Make a valid marking scheme for students to look at in the future.
There should be an 'essay' type question with Q.1 explaining the style and era of the piece and making the students study pieces more in depth instead of learning off themes (not testing dictation), techniques and general simple information of the piece (key, movement etc.)

Composition:
Melody
Not too bad I suppose but the main problem lies with the marking scheme. The marking of melodies and dance tunes can be too subjective and grades vary from examiner to examiner. Plus the fact that over 50% of a melody can be learnt off (modulation, sequence, imperfect cadence, and last 2 bars). Students should write for an instrument of their choice (maybe a set list of about 20 common western instruments). This gives an unfair advantage on students who study and play the flute/violin/etc and a disadvantage on students who study cello/bass//bassoon/viola/etc.
Overall the marking scheme needs to be addressed. The marks should be broken down into six sections as follows:
1) Variation 1
2) Modulation to Dominant (continued variation in minor key)
3) Sequence
4) Imperfect cadence
5) Variation 2
6) Perfect cadence
This would help stop the ambiguity of marking melodies and make examiners focus in on the melodies more. This method would also favour the student, for instance if the student messed up a bar in his/her sequence at least they can make up for the lost marks in other sections.
Chords
This section is done quite well in the composition paper. There is a bit of lee-way between the use of chords (e.g. G or Em). Although chord 'quality' and bar 'quality' are very ambiguous. Never the less still a well treated section.

Practical:
The practical in music is the reason why many (I don't have any statistics) students take this subject for Leaving Cert. The practical exam is handled well, with the exception to some parts left a bit too 'easy'. Music technology is a popular choice for students because of its simplicity on the course, bang in a few notes on you're laptop. Teens spend all day on their laptops, wouldn't you think they'd be good at using them. Especially with a very user-friendly interface like Sibelius or Finale. I'm not suggesting that music tech to be taken off the course but to be reformed (teach them how to change keys, change layouts, transpose and so many other simple things achievable on Sibelius/Finale).

Marking Allocation:
There are 55 marks allocated to all the set works. There are 60 marks allocated to one chord question. Where does that make sense? Set works are by far the most studying an taught part of the music curriculum. A chord question can be thought within two-three weeks. The examine gives ~1 hour for the set works to be completed. The examine then allows ~30mins for the chord question. As stated above, the set works questions need a new look and the marks going for them should be much higher.
Lastly, the idea of 50% of the exam as a practical is outrageous. This seems like a trick from the SEC to lure students to take music and then the students realize only a very small percentage get top grades in comparison to other subjects. Again, as stated above this is why many students take up music for LC, because the practical can be easy and its 50% of the entire exam!

BrianBoru00

New Subject:
Irish studies

at primary level
PART A - Irish Language
a) Irish language - "Comhra" conversational Irish in small groups
b) Introduce written work 2nd class short snappy pieces - utilising the likes of the Irish language supplement of the indo...

PART B - Civics
a) learn the words and meaning of the national anthem (in english & irish)
b) Instill pride in the culture and heritage of the country
c) As part of this - a module on emigration into and out of the country and understanding of minority groups /religions
d) learn about , elections / government rules of the road / important laws

PART C - History
a) Irish History for the first few years - linking to civics / Irish Language
b) short modules e.g 4 classes learning about the vikings

These become 2nd level subjects of Irish and History. All civics should be understood by finish of primary school.


Employ extra teachers and pump several million

LoganRice

There isn't enough emphasis placed on attaining esteem, developing conscience and other important areas of being human. Education isn't just about learning something new-it's about developing what you are already skilled at inately as an individual, and using those skills outside the vacuum of a schoolyard and exam environment. You can argue, does school even make an individual more <intelligent>?

Regularly I see students acquiring 600 points who are learned but morally immature-schools ought to teach earnestness, humility, courtesy, tolerance, how to make decisions and safely deal with death and love, so on so forth

Needless to say, since I haven't read the curriculum of each subject from primary to secondary, I'm not too sure if I'm informed enough to say what ought to be changed regarding subjects. Each seems to have some sort of quality that's worthwhile, dealing specifically with the designated area. I guess they could be build on, but I don't know how, personally

However, I do think that to abolish religion would be a terrible and essential mistake. Not only is it a fundamental to human society but it allows people to connect, have a sense of belonging, allows for dialogue, tolerance and understanding. Also, it reduces fear and allows for religious hope. This may be a more spiritual approach to what I said above, but it's certainly the closest thing we have to it

Overall, I think the educational system needs to cater for all sorts of people. It must be impartial and provide arguments for and against. It's gotta enable us to form our own unique concepts and learn about everything I mentioned above

Peregrine

LoganRice wrote: »

Overall, I think the educational system needs to cater for all sorts of people.

LoganRice wrote: »

However, I do think that to abolish religion would be a terrible and essential mistake.

So how does this cater for the increasing number of atheist students?

LoganRice wrote: »

Not only is it a fundamental to human society but it allows people to connect, have a sense of belonging, allows for dialogue, tolerance and understanding. Also, it reduces fear and allows for religious hope.

I don't want to drag this off topic but I would disagree with all of that.

'Religious hope'? Why force your religious hope on children?
I believe the OP was about re jigging the education system, not reviving religion.

dalta5billion

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

So how does this cater for the increasing number of atheist students?



I don't want to drag this off topic but I would disagree with all of that.

'Religious hope'? Why force your religious hope on children?
I believe the OP was about re jigging the education system, not reviving religion.

Atheist here, don't think religion should be abolished - then we're worse than the hardcore devout. Reality is most parents are, and want their children to be, religious.

However, if the fact that atheism/agnosticism exists and is treated with the same respect (looking at you, books by Catholic Press) as other religions, I'm fine with it.

I think it should be optional/opt-out for parents. Unfortunately Catholic schools seem to be able to prefer Catholic admissions - well, it is in the name. However, where did the money to build the schools come from? The majority of the population, who were Catholics.

I don't have a solution - do parents want their education to be secular, gov controlled or religious, independently controlled? Lots of arguments can be made against gov control of schools.

HugsiePie

Make Irish optional and less essayish, make religion less christian orientated (at least for JC anyways) Maths-blehhh, make it more college orientated, English rejig it, its too demanding, its worth the same amount of points as any other subject yet its the one people spend the most time on, Spanish, put more emphasis on grammar and verbs in jc-voab an be picked up later as opposed to revising over the absolute basics of the language on the day of the exam, art-make history of art a separate subject. Also introduce other subjects such as drama, health studies, first aid, etc.

Also I believe that an English approach such as focusing on only a few subjects at LC level could be a better idea than the system currently in place.

spurious

Go back to educating rather than training to pass exams.

Squidgy Black

There needs to be more continual assessment without a doubt. The whole idea of spending years working up to massive exams is mental, students need to be assessed on how they progress through the year.

I find it ironic that students spend 2 years working their way through subjects, to sit one massive exam to get into college, in which the majority of courses are part continual assessment.

OldNotWIse

Get rid of religion and Irish as mandatory subjects. Introduce European langauges at primary level.

spurious

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Get rid of religion and Irish as mandatory subjects. Introduce European langauges at primary level.

Up til recently, there was an initiative where European languages were taught in in primary. It was a victim of the cuts.

Days 298

spurious wrote: »

Up til recently, there was an initiative where European languages were taught in in primary. It was a victim of the cuts.

Was that the 1hour a week class where someone would come into the class? I had that back when I was primary school before the recession. Was useless and gave no one in my p.school an advantage in secondary school vs other kids who didn't do it. Glad its gone. Extra hour of PE it's what we should have got. But I hate languages so I'm biased.

My rejig would be to allow students seat exams in mandatory subjects in 5ft year so they don't need to in 6th year.

randylonghorn

Days 298 wrote: »

My rejig would be to allow students seat exams in mandatory subjects in 5ft year so they don't need to in 6th year.

I would actually be in favour of allowing students sitting higher papers in the core subjects (Maths / English / Irish) sit the OL papers about half way through 6th year.

It might need a bit of re-jigging of the syllabi, but wouldn't it be a huge bonus for students unsure whether they were able for HL in one of the trinity to know that even if it went bottom-up they already had a grade in the OL paper which they could use to satisfy requirements for CAO / university admission?

yoho139

randylonghorn wrote: »

even if it went bottom-up they already had a grade in the OL paper which they could use to satisfy requirements for CAO / university admission?

Holy sh*t, that's genius.

cathalio11

I'm seeing a bit along the lines of less Religion or no Religion as this would satisfy the growing Atheist population.

In my opinion, it's the ignorant attitudes of SOME Atheists that need fine tuning in Religion. There are a lot of non-religious people who could do with learning to appreciate the beliefs of others.

That being said, there are religious people who could do with that too.

I don't think Religion should be scrapped. But I do think that it could be linked in with appreciating different ethnicities and sexual orientations.

yoho139

cathalio11 wrote: »

I don't think Religion should be scrapped. But I do think that it could be linked in with appreciating different ethnicities and sexual orientations.

So stop calling it Religion and call it ethics and morality or something?

cathalio11

yoho139 wrote: »

So stop calling it Religion and call it ethics and morality or something?

Ethics sounds good.

Peregrine

I would welcome an ethics class replacing religion in schools.

Right now, what's being taught/discussed in religion class entirely depends on the teacher. I've had teachers who made me look forward to religion class and teachers who completely rejected any faith other than Christianity and didn't recognise atheists or agnostics - Once you were in their class, you were there to learn about Jesus.

That has to change. I don't mind if it's completely abolished or replaced with an ethics class. Personally I think moral principles are something you develop yourself rather than something that can be taught but it's worth a try I guess.

randylonghorn wrote: »

I would actually be in favour of allowing students sitting higher papers in the core subjects (Maths / English / Irish) sit the OL papers about half way through 6th year.

That's a really good idea.

HugsiePie

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

I would welcome an ethics class replacing religion in schools.

Right now, what's being taught/discussed in religion class entirely depends on the teacher. I've had teachers who made me look forward to religion class and teachers who completely rejected any faith other than Christianity and didn't recognise atheists or agnostics - Once you were in their class, you were there to learn about Jesus.

That has to change. I don't mind if it's completely abolished or replaced with an ethics class. Personally I think moral principles are something you develop yourself rather than something that can be taught but it's worth a try I guess

on THE SUBJECT OF religion-THE COURSE IS A Disgrace-RATHER THAN ETHICS CAUSE ETHICS REFERS AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO ACT-NOT A higher BEING-(sorry just noticed the cap locks) widen it ore out and learn about other religions and customs-which is a small part of the course, but its very small the subject f Jesus childhood is much bigger than that of for eg. Islam. make it less Christian orientated-my Muslim friend was completely lost in religion class cause it all referred to Catholicism basically.

randylonghorn

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

That's actually a good idea.

I love the "actually" / note of surprise! :pac:

Peregrine

randylonghorn wrote: »

I love the "actually" / note of surprise! :pac:

Disregard it, it wasn't a note of surprise