The Status Of Irish.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 11:06am

SkepticOne wrote: »

I will address some of the points in the article but first, please address my point about misallocation of resources, i.e. that resources should be concentrated on the early years.

From Conradh Na Gaeilge's Education policy. I did link to this in the OP.

One subject, as well as Irish, should be through the medium of Irish to all primary pupils, initially on a pilot basis with the necessary support and training;

The truth is that, yes you can raise the "status" of something by making it compulsory, but that is simply status within a very narrow context. It has nothing to do with status in the real world, but you know, I suspect for people who want compulsory Irish lessons for everyone, the real status of the language is unimportant. The sort of status they want is the status of something forced. It is not a case of the Irish language being a great language and therefore needs to be compulsory, it is great because it is compulsory and any retreat from compulsion is to be resisted even if it is a good thing for the language in the real world.

No, Irish language enthusiasts do everything possible to raise the status of the language.
This can be seen very clearly in NI,
Naisc
That project and projects like it else where are designed to raise the status of Irish in their communities and do so very well.

As a result in Belfast, where there is also a Cultúrlann, The Irish language has seen significant growth to the stage that they are now trying to establish a 'Gaelthacht Quarter' In the city.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 11:20am

nesf wrote: »

I'd favour making it optional. I fail to see the point in forcing people with poor aptitudes for leaning foreign languages to learn Irish. And yes is it a foreign language to them.

Let it be something that only those interested in it pick to learn and quality of teaching and the level of Irish taught in the classroom can rise accordingly resulting in people with LC Irish having something better for their time spent at the subject.

I don't think that is a problem as is, There are exemptions for people with learning Difficulties. One of the failings of the system now is that to many get out of Irish through the exemptions. 50% of those exempt from Irish learn other languages.

You persistantly ignore the possibility that the children do not wish to speak Irish and are callously determined that they can be forced to speak Irish through 'better teaching'.

The Children? I would certainly ignore the Idea that all of them are not open to learning Irish, A small proportion possibly are not open to it but until it is tried there is no real way to see what kind of proportion that is, I doubt it is a very significant proportion in any case.

You consistently ignore the possibility that the vast majority are open to learning Irish if it is tought correctly.

Indicating a limit to their commitment to maintaining Irish as a spoken language in the community. Commitment to a cause requires effort and sacrifice.

You can be as commited as you like, if there isent a community to speak it with then it is hardly possible to speak it with them every day:rolleyes:

Other than the cold fact that the majority of Irish people don't speak Irish and make no active effort to learn it?

You are confusing active commitment to being open to something.;)

So, by your logic, anyone who does not speak Irish, is simply an Irish speaker who does not speak Irish? That's one way to keep your numbers up.

No, My logic is that if someone fails to become fluent in Irish in an education System that is incapable if teaching them to be fluent in Irish it is not an indication that they reject Irish but rather the inevitable consequence of a poor system.

Why not flip this whole debate on its head ..

Lets campaign for all teaching, for all subjects, in all schools, to be in Irish.

Why ?

1. At 4 years of age, no child knows what they want to be taught and has no boundaries in what they are willing to learn. It will make no difference to the kids what language they are taught in. At that age it will simply be the norm and they will all be fluent in a matter of months.

2. If a child learns a language at this age, it will not be a burden or a hinderance to learning of any other subject in later life. In fact is likely to make learning 3rd and 4th languages considerably easier.

3. We will no longer have to pay any extra money to any teacher to teach through Irish, because they all will have too.

4. We can merge all the Gael schools back into the main stream schools, making much better use out of our very limited resources. This will reduce the class size average throughout the country.

5. It is my understanding that all our primary school teachers are already trained to teach in Irish, so there is no retraining to do.

6. It is our national language and we should all be able to speak it.

This could be instigated in the next school year for junior infants and rolled up year after year. This allows time to work on the syllabus for the later years now.

For the record;

I dont speak Irish.

The problem there is that the pool of teachers that would be competent to teach entirely through Irish is too small, That is why I support the natural growth of Gaelscoileanna in line with demand, that will allow the pool of competent teachers to grow over time.

braftery · 01-12-2010 11:43am

deise go deo wrote: »

The problem there is that the pool of teachers that would be competent to teach entirely through Irish is too small, That is why I support the natural growth of Gaelscoileanna in line with demand, that will allow the pool of competent teachers to grow over time.

Perhaps I am totally out of touch here, but is it not the case that all our primary teachers are trained to teach in the Irish language ?

Is this not a pre-requisite of their training ?

What you are suggesting is a "Two tier school system" ?

A two tier school system is simply not acceptable in either social or financial terms.

This will mean the constant split of resources that are already in very short supply and over the coming 5 years will continue to shrink.

We need one good school system.

If it is all through Irish than this debate simply disappears.

We can start training our teachers to teach through irish now and in 5 years we can start the system.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 12:06pm

braftery wrote: »

Perhaps I am totally out of touch here, but is it not the case that all our primary teachers are trained to teach in the Irish language ?

Is this not a pre-requisite of their training ?

What you are suggesting is a "Two tier school system" ?

A two tier school system is simply not acceptable in either social or financial terms.

This will mean the constant split of resources that are already in very short supply and over the coming 5 years will continue to shrink.

We need one good school system.

If it is all through Irish than this debate simply disappears.

We can start training our teachers to teach through irish now and in 5 years we can start the system.

All teachers are required to have a decent standard of Irish but that dosent mean they are at a level to teach Entirly through Irish, There are subject specific tecnical terms and phrases that they would not know etc.

Gaelscoileanna dont cause a two teir system and dont split resourses in Effect, they are the same as any other school, they just teach through Irish instead of English.

braftery · 01-12-2010 12:27pm

deise go deo wrote: »

All teachers are required to have a decent standard of Irish but that dosent mean they are at a level to teach Entirly through Irish, There are subject specific tecnical terms and phrases that they would not know etc.

Gaelscoileanna dont cause a two teir system and dont split resourses in Effect, they are the same as any other school, they just teach through Irish instead of English.

Gaelscoileanna more often than not exist in the same geographical (catchment) area, on seperate grounds with seperate buildings as other national schools.

If the Gaelscoileanna did not exist, these children would attend the traditional national school.

You can not begin to tell me that there is no increase in running costs for a seperate school.

This is a clear and simple duplification of services.

Additional Ground rent
additional Building Costs
Additional Staffing costs
Additional Insurance costs
The duplication of resource materials and equipment
etc, etc

However, that is not my point, nor do I wish to argue this point incessantly.

You are an advocate of the Irish language.

I will assume the following;

You wish to see all people in Ireland speak Irish as their Mother tongue.
You wish to see all children educated through the Irish Language.

To achieve this do you not agree that we need to have all teachers in all schools teach all subject through Irish ?

Why beat around the bush with Gaelscoileanna and other peripheral schemes ?

Can you not agree that the complete conversion of the school system to the Irish language will achieve your goals in the shortest time and most economical way ?

nesf · 01-12-2010 12:34pm

deise go deo wrote: »

I don't think that is a problem as is, There are exemptions for people with learning Difficulties. One of the failings of the system now is that to many get out of Irish through the exemptions. 50% of those exempt from Irish learn other languages.

You don't need a learning difficulty to have a poor aptitude for language learning. What point is there in forcing these people to learn? Really? They come out with an extremely low level of the language, so low as to being fairly pointless.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 12:39pm

braftery wrote: »

Gaelscoileanna more often than not exist in the same geographical (catchment) area, on seperate grounds with seperate buildings as other national schools.

If the Gaelscoileanna did not exist, these children would attend the traditional national school.

You can not begin to tell me that there is no increase in running costs for a seperate school.

This is a clear and simple duplification of services.

Additional Ground rent
additional Building Costs
Additional Staffing costs
Additional Insurance costs
The duplication of resource materials and equipment
etc, etc

However, that is not my point, nor do I wish to argue this point incessantly.

Gaelscoileanna were set up by parents and are only recognised if they have the numbers to justify them.

You are an advocate of the Irish language.

I will assume the following;

You wish to see all people in Ireland speak Irish as their Mother tongue.
You wish to see all children eductated through the Irish Language.

To achieve this do you not agree that we need to have all teachers in all schools teach all subject through Irish ?

Why beat around the bush with Gaelscoileanna and other peripheral schemes ?

Can you not agree that the complete conversion of the school system to the Irish language will achieve your goals in the shortest time and most economical way ?

I wish to see Irish grow as a spoken Language, I dont nessarily believe that Everyone should have Irish as their First language, I would prefer true Bi-Lingualism as the Ideal.

Yes, compleat conversion of the system to Irish Medium education would be the fastest way to do it, But I dont think it is the best way to do it as you would have a suatation where teachers are teaching through a language they are not Entirely comfortable with, That would lead to a drop in standards in education and would not be in the Countries Interest.

That is why I support the growth Of the Gaelscoileanna. I believe that they will gradually replace English medium Education in many areas Over time while allowing the pool of teachers who can teach through Irish to grow Natuarly. As it is there are Ten Gaelscoil Campaghains waiting for State recognition. The growth of the Gaelscoil movement is Increadable over the past 30 years And there is no indication that it is slacking off.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 12:43pm

nesf wrote: »

You don't need a learning difficulty to have a poor aptitude for language learning. What point is there in forcing these people to learn? Really? They come out with an extremely low level of the language, so low as to being fairly pointless.

As it is everyone must in effect learn a language anyway, even if it isent Irish, You get to choose which language, Usually French or German but learning a languages is not something you can in practice choose not to do.

braftery · 01-12-2010 12:43pm

All children learn thier own language as they grow.

Some learn slower than others but in the end we all have enough of our mother tongue to get by.

In multilingual homes they often learn two or more languages.

These same children can have learning disabilities in reading, writing in any or all of these languages or even in math.

Have you ever heard of any child being allowed not to take math because of a learning difficulty ?

We need to stop thinking of Irish as a school subject and start thinking of it as simply our language.

gimme5minutes · 01-12-2010 12:56pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Never mind that this is not what was being aimed for, it ended up in teachers becoming unemployed, Languages are considered an important part of education and for good reason, The Collapse of language learning in Britain was nothing short of a disaster.

Yeah, real world languages that are used by millions of people all over the world, not a language that is ony used by a few thousand people on the west of ireland.

I'll tell you what, why dont we make Irish students take compulsory Ancient Greek or Babylonian....? Because they are redundant languages hardly spoken by anyone these days and are of no use in the real world. They will not lead to anyone getting a job and contributing to society. Sound familiar? The only difference with the Irish language is we have a sentimental cultural attachment to it, so of course we don't want to see it go extinct. But as this is the only reason for learning it, way too much money and time is wasted on it which could be better spent learning stuff that is actually important and will enable students to contribute back to society.

The reason students are uninterested in Irish is because they know it is irrelevant and worthless when it comes to getting a job. For feck sake myself and my classmates had that figured out before we even left primary school twenty years ago.

You never addressed my other point - why should Irish be compulsory while other, more important, subjects are optional. So here it is again -

It's the same here in Ireland. The Irish language has basically no value in the real world as opposed to subjects like I.T., engineering, science, etc... Why should subjects like these be optional, when they are waay wayy more useful to students when it comes to finding a job and putting food on the table than Irish which is compulsory? We have hundreds of thousands students wasting millions of hours every year learning something that +99% of them will never even use when they leave school and that has no practical value in the real world. If students choose to study Irish, thats fair enough, but it shouldn't be rammed down their throats.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 1:04pm

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Yeah, real world languages that are used by millions of people all over the world, not a language that is ony used by a few thousand people on the west of ireland.

I'll tell you what, why dont we make Irish students take compulsory Ancient Greek or Babylonian....? Because they are redundant languages hardly spoken by anyone these days and are of no use in the real world. They will not lead to anyone getting a job and contributing to society. Sound familiar? The only difference with the Irish language is we have a sentimental cultural attachment to it, so of course we don't want to see it go extinct. But as this is the only reason for learning it, way too much money and time is wasted on it which could be better spent learning stuff that is actually important and will enable students to contribute back to society.

The reason students are uninterested in Irish is because they know it is irrelevant and worthless when it comes to getting a job. For feck sake myself and my classmates had that figured out before we even left primary school twenty years ago.

You never addressed my other point - why should Irish be compulsory while other, more important, subjects are optional. So here it is again -

It's the same here in Ireland. The Irish language has basically no value in the real world as opposed to subjects like I.T., engineering, science, etc... Why should subjects like these be optional, when they are waay wayy more useful to students when it comes to finding a job and putting food on the table than Irish which is compulsory? We have hundreds of thousands students wasting millions of hours every year learning something that +99% of them will never even use when they leave school and that has no practical value in the real world. If students choose to study Irish, thats fair enough, but it shouldn't be rammed down their throats.

There are, and this is fact. More Jobs and oppertunities to use Irish than there are for any other second language in this Country. Ignore it if you want but that is reality.

I have already addressed your second point.

There is no benifit to having all students learn a subject like Geography or Engineering over some students learning those subjects.

cyclopath2001 · 01-12-2010 1:21pm

deise go deo wrote: »

There are, and this is fact. More Jobs and oppertunities to use Irish than there are for any other second language in this Country. Ignore it if you want but that is reality.

How many of these job opportunities do not depend directly or indirectly on state funding?

For example, that TV production company, if TG4 loses its rather generous state subsidy, will it have a customer for its Irish-language programming?

The bulk of the jobs that you refer to art part of the massive 'make-work' scheme that the Irish lobby defends through forcing children to learn Irish and by demanding needless translation services.

We can save a lot of money by stopping this madness and allowing the true Irish language enthusiasts to show real personal commitment to preserving their language.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 1:27pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

We can save a lot of money by stopping this madness and allowing the true Irish language enthusiasts to show real personal commitment to preserving their language.

Like this? Gaelscoil Rath Tó

cyclopath2001 · 01-12-2010 2:37pm

I take it, by your silence, that the 'More Jobs and oppertunities to use Irish than there are for any other second language in this Country' are all makey-up jobs that depend on state funding? Jobs that do not contribute to the economy?

deise go deo wrote: »

Like this? Gaelscoil Rath Tó

Nice effort, but why is the school not recognised?

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 2:43pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Nice effort, but why is the school not recognised?

The state decided to bactrack on their own predictions on the need for a new school in the area. The parents decided to go ahead and prove them wrong.

nesf · 01-12-2010 2:50pm

deise go deo wrote: »

As it is everyone must in effect learn a language anyway, even if it isent Irish, You get to choose which language, Usually French or German but learning a languages is not something you can in practice choose not to do.

Only because of a silly system that requires a foreign language and Irish to enter most colleges in this country. But for those not going to 3rd level there is very little point in forcing them to do any language against their will.

DJP · 01-12-2010 2:56pm

deise go deo,

You made two points that I want to correct. First of all an Cheathrú Gaeltachta/the Gaeltacht Quarter in Belfast is there now.

Secondly there are 16 campaigns for new gaelscoileanna in Ireland, not ten, and there is an immediate interest in setting up new gaelscoileanna at primary level in six other areas. I think that the eight for the second-level are more important in the short-term in terms of which ones should be given recognition as a priority.

http://www.gaelscoileanna.ie/schools/scoileanna-nua/?lang=ie

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

We can save a lot of money by stopping this madness and allowing the true Irish language enthusiasts to show real personal commitment to preserving their language.

Hopefully the next FG/LP Govt. will audit the money spent on Irish so that we get better value for money. The money spent on TG4 and the effect of that on independent television companies is already money well spent though I think. I mean that I think that it is audited well.

Those civil service Irish exams are hard. I wouldn't pass one of them. There would be a lot of people working in the Department of Education and Skills I would say who have good Irish but not the level to pass the exams in it. You need to have excellent Irish to pass those exams.

braftery · 01-12-2010 2:57pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Gaelscoileanna were set up by parents and are only recognised if they have the numbers to justify them.

I wish to see Irish grow as a spoken Language, I dont nessarily believe that Everyone should have Irish as their First language, I would prefer true Bi-Lingualism as the Ideal.

Yes, compleat conversion of the system to Irish Medium education would be the fastest way to do it, But I dont think it is the best way to do it as you would have a suatation where teachers are teaching through a language they are not Entirely comfortable with, That would lead to a drop in standards in education and would not be in the Countries Interest.

That is why I support the growth Of the Gaelscoileanna. I believe that they will gradually replace English medium Education in many areas Over time while allowing the pool of teachers who can teach through Irish to grow Natuarly. As it is there are Ten Gaelscoil Campaghains waiting for State recognition. The growth of the Gaelscoil movement is Increadable over the past 30 years And there is no indication that it is slacking off.

True Bi-lingualism will be a by-product of an all Irish speaking education system. Which language an individual chooses to speak in his or her daily life is a free choice.

I repeat that my understanding that, All primary school teachers in Ireland, are already meant to be trained to teach all subjects through Irish.
They are being trained to teach in the Irish state.
This is a reasonable request and one that I am sure you will agree with.

In this last paragraph you are advocating the continous slow growth of Gaelscoileanna which will lead to a continous slow decline of English speaking schools.

This is in effect a dual school, or two tier system.
One in growth and one in decline.

Will this in effect mean that in the end the currently small school buildings of the Gaelscoileanna will continue to expand until they are the same size as todays traditional schools buildings. And the country will be left with twice as many schools as we need ?

Or do you mean that in the end you would like to see half our schools teaching in Irish and half in English ? Forcing parents to decide which language they choose for their children.

Iwasfrozen · 01-12-2010 3:25pm

braftery wrote: »

True Bi-lingualism will be a by-product of an all Irish speaking education system. Which language an individual chooses to speak in his or her daily life is a free choice.

I repeat that my understanding that, All primary school teachers in Ireland, are already meant to be trained to teach all subjects through Irish.
They are being trained to teach in the Irish state.
This is a reasonable request and one that I am sure you will agree with.

In this last paragraph you are advocating the continous slow growth of Gaelscoileanna which will lead to a continous slow decline of English speaking schools.

This is in effect a dual school, or two tier system.
One in growth and one in decline.

Will this in effect mean that in the end the currently small school buildings of the Gaelscoileanna will continue to expand until they are the same size as todays traditional schools buildings. And the country will be left with twice as many schools as we need ?

Or do you mean that in the end you would like to see half our schools teaching in Irish and half in English ? Forcing parents to decide which language they choose for their children.

Has it ever crossed your mind that parents may not want their children educated in Irish?

cyclopath2001 · 01-12-2010 3:34pm

deise go deo wrote: »

The state decided to bactrack on their own predictions on the need for a new school in the area. The parents decided to go ahead and prove them wrong.

Is this the whole story and is there an independent source for this explanation?

Darren J. Prior wrote:

You made two points that I want to correct. First of all an Cheathrú Gaeltachta/the Gaeltacht Quarter in Belfast is there now.

Would it be correct to say that these were not funded by the Irish language community?

DJP · 01-12-2010 3:40pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Would it be correct to say that these were not funded by the Irish language community?

Well it came about by three reasons and funding was essential for two of them. Firstly the Bóthar Seoighe/the Shaws Road Gaeltacht was set up, in the early 70's I think. No funding was needed.

The gaelscoileanna were set up. State funding was needed.

Forbairt Feirste worked with the business sector in the area to help them have Irish/bilingual signage and I believe sometimes to have Irish-speaking staff on request. Funding was needed for Forbairt Feirste.

I do decry the amount of waffle though in relation to the Irish language. People seem to think that groups or funded groups are necessary to do all work whereas in fact individual activists can do a lot of the work e.g. putting up Irish or bilingual signs. I have myself put up Irish/bilingual signs in around 40 places in Dublin.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 3:41pm

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

deise go deo,

You made two points that I want to correct. First of all an Cheathrú Gaeltachta/the Gaeltacht Quarter in Belfast is there now.

Secondly there are 16 campaigns for new gaelscoileanna in Ireland, not ten, and there is an immediate interest in setting up new gaelscoileanna at primary level in six other areas. I think that the eight for the second-level are more important in the short-term in terms of which ones should be given recognition as a priority.

http://www.gaelscoileanna.ie/schools/scoileanna-nua/?lang=ie

Hopefully the next FG/LP Govt. will audit the money spent on Irish so that we get better value for money. The money spent on TG4 and the effect of that on independent television companies is already money well spent though I think. I mean that I think that it is audited well.

Those civil service Irish exams are hard. I wouldn't pass one of them. There would be a lot of people working in the Department of Education and Skills I would say who have good Irish but not the level to pass the exams in it. You need to have excellent Irish to pass those exams.

When I said there are plans to establish a Gaelthacht Quarter in Belfast what I meant was that there is an on going project in Belfast to create a Gaelthacht Quarter. Not that is only being planed.

Thanks for the correction on the number of new gaelscoileanna awaiting state support.

True Bi-lingualism will be a by-product of an all Irish speaking education system. Which language an individual chooses to speak in his or her daily life is a free choice.

I repeat that my understanding that, All primary school teachers in Ireland, are already meant to be trained to teach all subjects through Irish.
They are being trained to teach in the Irish state.
This is a reasonable request and one that I am sure you will agree with.

In this last paragraph you are advocating the continous slow growth of Gaelscoileanna which will lead to a continous slow decline of English speaking schools.

This is in effect a dual school, or two tier system.
One in growth and one in decline.

Will this in effect mean that in the end the currently small school buildings of the Gaelscoileanna will continue to expand until they are the same size as todays traditional schools buildings. And the country will be left with twice as many schools as we need ?

Or do you mean that in the end you would like to see half our schools teaching in Irish and half in English ? Forcing parents to decide which language they choose for their children.

Teachers in primary schools are expected to be able to teach Irish, not to be able to teach all subjects through Irish.

I dont see it as a two tier system as there would be no difference in the quality of education recieved.

I dont think there will end up with twice as many schools as we need, as it is now Gaelscoileanna are only recognized if they have the numbers to justify them, Ultimately I would like to see, when the gaelscoil movement reaches critical mass, existing English Medium Schools change to Irish medium Schools voluntarily.

I dont set any target for the proportion of gaelscoileanna in relation to English medium education, Let them grow to satisfy the level of the demand.

Has it ever crossed your mind that parents may not want their children educated in Irish?

Indeed it has, thats one reason I support the growth of gaelscoileanna in line with the demand for them rather than a widespread conversion in the short term.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 3:54pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Is this the whole story and is there an independent source for this explanation?

Nothing is ever good enough for you is it? Would you be this skeptical of something that supported your point of view?

The story is, as I have heard it that the state in its plans decided that due to projected population increase there would be need for a new school in that area. Local parents decided that if there was to be a new school, they wanted it to be a Gaelscoil and set about campaigning for it accordingly. When the time came instead of recognizing the new Gaelscoil the state decided that there was not a need for a new school after all, The Parents decided to go ahead with the new gaelscoil anyway, The school dose not receive any funding from the state and is instead funded by donations from parents, fundraising and Irish language organisations like Conradh na Gaeilge.

1

2

DJP · 01-12-2010 4:02pm

deise go deo wrote: »

When I said there are plans to establish a Gaelthacht Quarter in Belfast what I meant was that there is an on going project in Belfast to create a Gaelthacht Quarter. Not that is only being planed.

The area needs to be rejuvenated. The Cultúrlann there is getting rejuvenated but the housing estates (that I have seen) need to be knocked down like the flats in Ballymun are. Otherwise the area will not be attractive for most people to live in. I would say that the growth in Irish in the area goes in tandem with the rejuvenation of the area. The area- along the Falls Road- is an official Gaeltacht Quarter now but I can't see the area developing more until the whole area is developed.

SkepticOne · 01-12-2010 4:28pm

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

Hopefully the next FG/LP Govt. will audit the money spent on Irish so that we get better value for money. The money spent on TG4 and the effect of that on independent television companies is already money well spent though I think. I mean that I think that it is audited well.

FGs plans to drop compulsory Irish in the last two years of secondary school has to be welcomed in this respect. It will open the door for further value for money measures. This is the most important aspect of it: it breaks the taboo that you mustn't touch Irish. The beneficiaries of this will be both those who want to see the language flourish and those who think the options should be there for the studying of other subjects in the place of compulsory Irish at leaving cert level.

braftery · 01-12-2010 4:29pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Teachers in primary schools are expected to be able to teach Irish, not to be able to teach all subjects through Irish.

I dont see it as a two tier system as there would be no difference in the quality of education recieved.

I dont think there will end up with twice as many schools as we need, as it is now Gaelscoileanna are only recognized if they have the numbers to justify them, Ultimately I would like to see, when the gaelscoil movement reaches critical mass, existing English Medium Schools change to Irish medium Schools voluntarily.

I dont set any target for the proportion of gaelscoileanna in relation to English medium education, Let them grow to satisfy the level of the demand.

I agree that the Gaelscoileanna programme has been successful.

However, the logical conclusion of your idea means as a nation we are forced to choose the language our children are educated in.

This is both divisive and wrong.

We will end up with a dual school system.
It appears that we are failing to run one school system effectively, what chance have we at running two of them.

We need a shift in our thinking in our overall education system that recognises the fact that teaching everyone through Irish will create an all inclusive and simpler education system.

DJP · 01-12-2010 4:38pm

SkepticOne wrote: »

It will open the door for further value for money measures. This is the most important aspect of it: it breaks the taboo that you mustn't touch Irish. The beneficiaries of this will be both those who want to see the language flourish

I agree. And Labour are in favour of making it optional also so it looks like the change may happen for next September!!!

Iwasfrozen · 01-12-2010 4:40pm

braftery wrote: »

I agree that the Gaelscoileanna programme has been successful.

However, the logical conclusion of your idea means as a nation we are forced to choose the language our children are educated in.

This is both divisive and wrong.

We will end up with a dual school system.
It appears that we are failing to run one school system effectively, what chance have we at running two of them.

We need a shift in our thinking in our overall education system that recognises the fact that teaching everyone through Irish will create an all inclusive and simpler education system.

Again, has it ever crossed your mind that some parents may not want their children educated in Irish?

As for simplicity it is much simpler to teach everyone through english like we do now.

cyclopath2001 · 01-12-2010 5:04pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Local parents decided that if there was to be a new school, they wanted it to be a Gaelscoil

Was this all local parents or just those who wanted their children to be taught through the medium of Irish?

gimme5minutes · 01-12-2010 5:58pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I take it, by your silence, that the 'More Jobs and oppertunities to use Irish than there are for any other second language in this Country' are all makey-up jobs that depend on state funding? Jobs that do not contribute to the economy?

Yep, and he remained silent after this post too....because you are dead right. The only jobs in Irish are all 'makey-up' jobs as you called them. Jobs that are made up purely for the sake of having something to use Irish for. Ridiculous forcing people to learn this redundant language. If the government wants to force people to learn a language it should be something link Spanish, Portuguese, Mandarin or French, languages that are spoken by hundreds of millions of people...each.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 7:49pm

SkepticOne wrote: »

FGs plans to drop compulsory Irish in the last two years of secondary school has to be welcomed in this respect. It will open the door for further value for money measures. This is the most important aspect of it: it breaks the taboo that you mustn't touch Irish. The beneficiaries of this will be both those who want to see the language flourish and those who think the options should be there for the studying of other subjects in the place of compulsory Irish at leaving cert level.

Two points, FG used to have droping Irish in the last two years as part of their education policy, It was suggested that doing so would help Irish grow but they never backed up that claim with evidience.
Since then they have scraped that policy and are currently formulating a new one, It is supposidly going to be based on the Sweedish model. Their position on Irish has yet to be announced.

Secondly. 'The beneficiaries of this will be both those who want to see the language flourish' FG made this argument but never backed it up, So what are you basing this argument on? I would like to see some evidince supporting this.

As for simplicity it is much simpler to teach everyone through english like we do now.

We dont, There is a small but growing percentage tought through the medium of Irish.

Was this all local parents or just those who wanted their children to be taught through the medium of Irish?

It was the choice of parents who wanted their Kids tought through Irish. Why?

Iwasfrozen · 01-12-2010 8:04pm

deise go deo wrote: »

We dont, There is a small but growing percentage tought through the medium of Irish.

I ment in normal primary schools. Obviously not in gaelscoils.

SkepticOne · 01-12-2010 9:11pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Secondly. 'The beneficiaries of this will be both those who want to see the language flourish' FG made this argument but never backed it up, So what are you basing this argument on? I would like to see some evidince supporting this.

I'm basing it on the fact that languages are best taught in the early years and that if you haven't learned it by 15 you are not going to learn it in a couple more years. All you do is build up resentment by forcing the language down throats. Makes a lot of sense I think you will agree.

astrofool · 01-12-2010 9:44pm

deise go deo wrote: »

What benifits? The Benifits from Bi-Lingualism come from all languages, As I said there are more oppertunities to use Irish, and More jobs using it in this country.

There are very few non state backed jobs that require Irish, it also ignores the fact that teaching French or German would give people the opportunity to take jobs in France and Germany (which would far outnumber the limited number of state jobs here).

deise go deo wrote: »

Yes more Benifit than Blancket Knolage of one of those subjects. Everyone knowing Geography is not any more useful than some people knowing geography so there is no point in teaching it to every one.

To pick one subject that could be mandatory: Science (one of phys/bio/chem) should be mandatory, companies are crying out for graduates of science degrees, the smart economy needs science graduates, and is having to go further and further afield to fill that need. There are jobs in the field that pay well, and there are actually jobs in the field. Points in science have been dropping steadily over the years, leading to a reduced number of good graduates, making it harder for companies to hire staff. It is also export led (MS, Intel, Google etc.) and has very large benefits to the economy.

deise go deo wrote: »

Re-structuring the Education system and Hireing the teachers to actually teach it.

You admit the current system is broken, if we have to re-structure anyway, why not re-structure to a language with uses beyond our borders, take the hit now for future gains. I'd also imagine that the cost difference wouldn't actually be that great given the woeful condition of Irish teaching in our schools, root and branch re-org is often more difficult/expensive than just starting again anyway.

deise go deo wrote: »

I think this company would disagree with you there.
Nemeton
Their Business is run through Irish by the way;)

They have produced piecies for the BBC and an American TV company before.

And its not creating fa;se need, It is creating actual need.

One media company, how much government grant money do they get (if any)? Where does their programming show? What advertising revenue does their programming generate? Do you really expect the world to demand more Irish language exports because we speak it more? Do we demand anything in Swedish (to take a native language that is actually used)?

deise go deo wrote: »

That makes no difference, the Benifit of Bi-Lingualism still apply.

So, why not make it a language that will pay back itself, rather than one that just happened to be spoken here years ago.

deise go deo wrote: »

Why wouldent they use it? If two people can speak in a language odds are they will, if they can both speak English then they will speak in English but if they can also both speak in Irish do you not thin it makes sence that Irish will also be used?

Do you ever hear spanish students speaking in English to each other in social situations? It's not something that happens to any great extent. I'm sure it does happen occasionally, but people use their mother tongue when it's available, not an additional learned language.

deise go deo wrote: »

If, But, Irish is compulsory. That is the situation as it is now. The Evidence that has been presented suggested that the vast majority want Irish to be promoted, Having Irish compulsory is by far the best way to do that.
It dosent make sence to make the majority of subjects compulsory, As I said, There is no benifit to having every one learn Geography over having some pepple learn it as is the case now. There is benifit in having every one learn Irish.

I want Irish to be promoted, I don't want it to be compulsary, one does not imply the other. The benefit of "Irish" can also be contributed to far more useful languages, there is no benefit to "Irish" over other more spoken languages.

deise go deo wrote: »

How would jobs created take mony from other seactors. Take Nematon for example, They are in the TV Sector, How are they taking money from that sector? They are not, they are generating employment and profit.

There is a limited amount of money in the Irish (country, not language) market, by spending it on jobs in the Irish language sector, we reduce the money spent on other sectors. Is Nematon self sufficient, and how much of it's revenue is generated from abroad? Is there many more examples other than Nematon?

deise go deo wrote: »

What subject would you replace it with and why?

Outlined above.

deise go deo wrote: »

Pie in the sky?
Step 1
Reform Irish in the Education system and leave it compulsory,

Step 2
Support the Gaelscoil movement and allow it to grow in line with demand.

This will increase the use of Irish steadily in Irish society. Why? Because the pool of people capable of Using Irish will be Increasing.
Simple Actually.

Again, why Irish, why not French? If cost/structure was not an issue, would you support French, and French schools over Irish schools, given the greater benefits, and more widespread use of the language?

And again, why not give people the choice? What is wrong with that?

scoll · 01-12-2010 9:59pm

I am 19, and am currently in college to become a primary school teacher.

I absolutely love the language. I used to HATE it, but in the last few years of secondary school, I grew to love it. The idea of making it optional for the last two years in secondary school is completely ridiculous. If I had been given that option, I wouldn't have taken Irish.I would have waved goodbye to the language and set off happy into 5th year. I couldn't be happier that it was compulsory. If I hadn't done Irish, I wouldn't be in college to be a primary school teacher.

I'm not passionate about keeping Irish for the sake of "Oh... it's our duty as a country to keep our language alive. Blah blah blah", but I am passionate about keeping Irish for the sake of each and every person. For some, being able to speak the Irish language is like a talent. My parents are envious that I can speak it, and I think everyone should be. My dad constantly asks me to teach him a few words. This can't happen in the future.

Being able to speak a minority language is something amazing. Cherish it!

scoll · 01-12-2010 10:03pm

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm basing it on the fact that languages are best taught in the early years and that if you haven't learned it by 15 you are not going to learn it in a couple more years. All you do is build up resentment by forcing the language down throats. Makes a lot of sense I think you will agree.

Completely untrue. I only really began to learn the language when I went into 5th year. Before then, I hated the language and I was useless at it. By the time I came to 6th year, I loved it so much that I wanted to teach it to others. This was the main reason I went into primary school teaching.

Iwasfrozen · 01-12-2010 10:11pm

scoll wrote: »

Completely untrue. I only really began to learn the language when I went into 5th year. Before then, I hated the language and I was useless at it. By the time I came to 6th year, I loved it so much that I wanted to teach it to others. This was the main reason I went into primary school teaching.

Then you are an extraordinary case.

LordSutch · 01-12-2010 10:22pm

scoll wrote: »

I am 19, and am currently in college to become a primary school teacher.

I absolutely love the language. I used to HATE it, but in the last few years of secondary school, I grew to love it. The idea of making it optional for the last two years in secondary school is completely ridiculous. If I had been given that option, I wouldn't have taken Irish.I would have waved goodbye to the language and set off happy into 5th year. I couldn't be happier that it was compulsory. If I hadn't done Irish, I wouldn't be in college to be a primary school teacher.

You are an exception to the rule scoll, well done to you & good luck with your vocation, but you must be aware that the vast majority of Irish people do not share your view, neither can they speak Irish, 'The one size fits all' mentality to the language does not work, never has & never will, making the language optional will enhance its standing & promote the language in a positive light, instead of it being perceived as a torturous business that we were were made do at school :mad:

scoll wrote: »

Being able to speak a minority language is something amazing. Cherish it!

I agree, so have a word in the Education ministers shell-like & spill the beans "Many Irish people still hate the language" or should I say, successive generations have hated the way it has been force fed upon all kids for over eighty years. Personally speaking I like the idea of Irish surviving, just not at the expense of it being a mandatory subject for all children.

deise go deo · 01-12-2010 11:51pm

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm basing it on the fact that languages are best taught in the early years and that if you haven't learned it by 15 you are not going to learn it in a couple more years. All you do is build up resentment by forcing the language down throats. Makes a lot of sense I think you will agree.

So we should make English optional also? And Language learning in general, That is the logical extension of your argument.

You are right, If you have not learned a language by 15 you will not learn it in the last 2 years either, But as I have said several times by now

I am Not arguing that the system should be left as it is now!

I want a full and compressive reform of the system. I do not believe that Irish would not be learned to a reasonable degree by 15, it should be, however the whole point of the article I linked to in the OP shows that reducing the status of a second language it has a domino effect in all areas not just in the one affected by the change made.
This would make Learning Irish up to 15 seem even more pointless than it is now and as such would negatively impact on results.

Making the language optional will enhance its standing & promote the language in a positive light,

I believe that this has been shown to be false, Please explain how you came to this conclusion, despite the evidence to the contrary that I have provided and please feel free to back up your claim with your own evidence(assuming you actually have any)

There are very few non state backed jobs that require Irish, it also ignores the fact that teaching French or German would give people the opportunity to take jobs in France and Germany (which would far outnumber the limited number of state jobs here).

Firstly that is not the point I was making, There are more Jobs here that require Irish than any other second language, Why these jobs exist dose not take away from their existence. Do you think it matters to someone looking for a job? It is food on the table for them at the end of the day.

Secondly, Why exactly should this state fund education for people to go and work and pay tax in France or elsewhere? That is very faulty economics if you ask me.

To pick one subject that could be mandatory: Science (one of phys/bio/chem) should be mandatory, companies are crying out for graduates of science degrees, the smart economy needs science graduates, and is having to go further and further afield to fill that need. There are jobs in the field that pay well, and there are actually jobs in the field. Points in science have been dropping steadily over the years, leading to a reduced number of good graduates, making it harder for companies to hire staff. It is also export led (MS, Intel, Google etc.) and has very large benefits to the economy.

So we teach every child in the state physics. And then what, Do you think anything but a tiny proportion, No matter what the circumstance, will ever be able to avail of that? So what about the majority that will never and by the shear set up of any economy can never use, The money used to fund their education will have been wasted in the truest sense of the word, IE the money was spent with absolutely no possibility of return or benefit to the person.
This is an extremely poor solution tho the problem in science and can only apply to one of them, The others are left in the state they are in now.

Not so with Irish,or any language for that matter, The act of language learning is of benefit in its self. Every child who learns a second language can benefit from doing so. That is true of all languages and Irish no less than any other.

You admit the current system is broken, if we have to re-structure anyway, why not re-structure to a language with uses beyond our borders, take the hit now for future gains. I'd also imagine that the cost difference wouldn't actually be that great given the woeful condition of Irish teaching in our schools, root and branch re-org is often more difficult/expensive than just starting again anyway.

Indeed it is.
We don't need to re-structure the system for Irish, we need to reform what is done within the existing structure. The problem with Irish is a centralized one. its not the root and branch that is at fault. The teachers and schools are perfectly capable individuals and institutions. The problem lies with what these individuals are expected to do, their actions are restricted by the curriculum they are expected to teach. Changing the curriculum would be neither difficult nor expencive.

A root and branch re-structure would need to be undertaken to make Irish optional and French(for example) Compulsory as it would entail a change in personnel, class times being changed greatly, exams being altered and the systems for dealing with the subjects having to be altered drastically. This could well prove both difficult and expensive and all without a hint of desire from the people that it is wanted.

One media company, how much government grant money do they get (if any)? Where does their programming show? What advertising revenue does their programming generate? Do you really expect the world to demand more Irish language exports because we speak it more? Do we demand anything in Swedish (to take a native language that is actually used)?

No, one example to disprove your point. I don't know the ins and outs of this business no more than any other.

What it dose show is the quality and success of Irish language enterprises, Especially when put in contrast to the State supported English language Equivalent RTÉ.

Do you ever hear spanish students speaking in English to each other in social situations? It's not something that happens to any great extent. I'm sure it does happen occasionally, but people use their mother tongue when it's available, not an additional learned language.

Your point is very poor, think about it, the very existence of Irish as a spoken language outside the Gaelthacht disproves it. If your point stood up how could the existence of the Gaelscoil movement be explained?

I want Irish to be promoted, I don't want it to be compulsary, one does not imply the other. The benefit of "Irish" can also be contributed to far more useful languages, there is no benefit to "Irish" over other more spoken languages.

I would very much like to know how.
(unless you can show some very convincing evidence, making it optional in schools will not be accepted as promoting Irish)

There is no greater benefit to Irish in terms of Bi-Lingualism, I never claimed there was, nor is there any benefit to other languages over Irish.

There is a limited amount of money in the Irish (country, not language) market, by spending it on jobs in the Irish language sector, we reduce the money spent on other sectors. Is Nematon self sufficient, and how much of it's revenue is generated from abroad? Is there many more examples other than Nematon?

Lets take Nematon, or I suppose TG4 more properly,
In terms of the quality produced, TG4 Has its English language counterpart RTÉ which gets far more state support, well beaten. So in this case would it not be logical to put money into the higher quality option?

Again, why Irish, why not French? If cost/structure was not an issue, would you support French, and French schools over Irish schools, given the greater benefits, and more widespread use of the language?

And again, why not give people the choice? What is wrong with that?

Well first, cost is an issue, if the system is going to be changed, and its going to cost money to do so then there had better be clear benefit to doing so.
I don't believe there is any economic benefit to this country to making French compulsory instead of Irish and there is no benefit in terms of the education of the child.

As for French schools, I have no problem with them as a concept, but Im sure you agree that their setting up should be governed by the same rules as Irish schools.
As far as I am aware there is nothing preventing parents from setting up a French Medium School if they so wish, The absence of these schools then must be due to lack of interest.
Not so with Gaelscoileanna where interest is unrepresented and growing year on year.

As for your last point, I believe that reform of Irish is the best way forward, I believe that if it is reformed then the use of Irish would increase steadily.
I don't know if it is your belief, but the opinion has been expressed that no amount of reform in the curriculum will make any difference, that Irish will still not be learned. If Irish was reformed and that proved to be the case then I would have no objection to Irish being made Optional.

Dannyboy83 · 02-12-2010 12:17am

Not sure if you can listen online but this was discussed on The Right Hook/Newstalk today after 6.

Some guy from Enterprise Ireland was suggesting that Irish people are losing out by not being able to speak the languages of european trading partners or emerging markets.

Worth a listen.

deise go deo · 02-12-2010 12:20am

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Not sure if you can listen online but this was discussed on The Right Hook/Newstalk today after 6.

Some guy from Enterprise Ireland was suggesting that Irish people are losing out by not being able to speak the languages of european trading partners or emerging markets.

Worth a listen.

Any link?

Chuchoter · 02-12-2010 12:25am

But we still don't know why someone going into a normal (read not makey uppy as cyclopath2001 puts it) would ever want Irish when they have other languages. I don't want to do Irish, I'm nearly 18, and you still want to make me take it when it will serve no purpose in my life.

Also, as someone who takes all three sciences in school, physics is the only one with real visible everyday applications. Mirrors, lenses, fibre optic lamps, how torches work, water, heat, kettles, cars, electricity the list goes on and on. I use it one hundred times more than I use Irish.

SkepticOne · 02-12-2010 12:38am

deise go deo wrote: »

So we should make English optional also? And Language learning in general, That is the logical extension of your argument.

You are right, If you have not learned a language by 15 you will not learn it in the last 2 years either, But as I have said several times by now

I am Not arguing that the system should be left as it is now!

I want a full and compressive reform of the system. I do not believe that Irish would not be learned to a reasonable degree by 15, it should be, however the whole point of the article I linked to in the OP shows that reducing the status of a second language it has a domino effect in all areas not just in the one affected by the change made.
This would make Learning Irish up to 15 seem even more pointless than it is now and as such would negatively impact on results.

Some of those other areas have merit. It is a large and complex topic but it is the compulsory aspect of Irish that I believe to be damaging and that is what I think needs to be knocked on the head and therefore I'm likely to give strong consideration to any party that puts it forward as an election promise that compulsory classes for the final years at school be dropped.

Unless of course there are strong arguments to keep it. Personally I haven't seen any, either on this thread or elsewhere.

With regards to English, or other subjects being compulsory my view is you progress towards completing your education you should gradually be offered more choice, and if something is to be compulsory it should because of practical considerations based on what you will need outside school.

Therefore, say, history, Latin, biology and most other subjects can be dropped. English you need for day to day living. You need to be fairly fluent in reading and writing to get by in society.

A lot get to 5th year without a huge amount of literacy but this is something that can still be taught. Adults late in life can be taught to read and write and it is a valuable skill. I have seen statistics that say that 20% of adults in Ireland are not functionally literate. And even those who are reasonably literate can benefit from further training. Therefore I would keep it.

So basically in the sort of system that we have where there's a fairly large number of subjects, then a small core of useful subjects and then a good degree of choice is what I would advocate. We can debate which subjects should be in the compulsory category (England, for example doesn't even have compulsory English at A-level) but I would regard Irish language at this level to be part of the optional group like history or Latin.

deise go deo · 02-12-2010 12:57am

SkepticOne wrote: »

With regards to English, or other subjects being compulsory my view is you progress towards completing your education you should gradually be offered more choice, and if something is to be compulsory it should because of practical considerations based on what you will need outside school.

Therefore, say, history, Latin, biology and most other subjects can be dropped. English you need for day to day living. You need to be fairly fluent in reading and writing to get by in society.

A lot get to 5th year without a huge amount of literacy but this is something that can still be taught. Adults late in life can be taught to read and write and it is a valuable skill. I have seen statistics that say that 20% of adults in Ireland are not functionally literate. And even those who are reasonably literate can benefit from further training. Therefore I would keep it.

There is nothing of practical benefit, applicable to every day life learned in English in the final two years of school.

You could argue that this could be changed and it could be made benifical but as it is now it isent.
Oddly, What we have here is a swap over from the Irish argument with you for and me against English remaining Compulsory with the arguments effectively swapping over too. Any argument you make against Irish for LC I can make against English, Same with any defense i make for Irish you can use for English.

I don't see English as useful in its self for LC, There is nothing practical about it, the one possible practical thing it could do, Improve literacy rates, it dosent do.(This is true)
So we have the Drop compulsion or reform curriculum argument again except the other way around, Now if you examine why you think English should remain Compulsory then I think you may find a greater insight into my arguments for Irish.

(I don't really believe English should be made optional but assume I do for the analogy.)

SkepticOne · 02-12-2010 1:22am

deise go deo wrote: »

There is nothing of practical benefit, applicable to every day life learned in English in the final two years of school.

You could argue that this could be changed and it could be made benifical but as it is now it isent.

How do you know that people don't learn useful skills in English reading and writing after group cert? Adults who have been illiterate all their lives have been taught to read and write late in life and this has been of great benefit to them in their day to day existence. Obviously it is better to do this when you are young but it is not like learning a language where being below a certain age is of huge benefit. In English what is taught is not the language but literacy in the language.

Oddly, What we have here is a swap over from the Irish argument with you for and me against English remaining Compulsory with the arguments effectively swapping over too. Any argument you make against Irish for LC I can make against English, Same with any defense i make for Irish you can use for English.

I don't see English as useful in its self for LC, There is nothing practical about it, the one possible practical thing it could do, Improve literacy rates, it dosent do.(This is true)
So we have the Drop compulsion or reform curriculum argument again except the other way around, Now if you examine why you think English should remain Compulsory then I think you may find a greater insight into my arguments for Irish.

(I don't really believe English should be made optional but assume I do for the analogy.)

The reason I don't think agree with this is that English classes are not the same as foreign language classes. You are already fluent in English because you live in a country where that is the primary spoken language. Your ability to spell and form sentences is of immediate practical benefit outside of school. Irish will only ever be that way for a tiny minority. For every one else, as soon as they leave school, they start forgetting whatever they may once have learned.

Therefore, concentrate resources:
a) On the years when language learning is most effective, i.e. the primary level and
b) on those who have a bit of aptitude and enthusiasm in later years.

I still haven't seen any arguments against these principles on this thread.

deise go deo · 02-12-2010 1:34am

SkepticOne wrote: »

How do you know that people don't learn useful skills in English reading and writing after group cert? Adults who have been illiterate all their lives have been taught to read and write late in life and this has been of great benefit to them in their day to day existence. Obviously it is better to do this when you are young but it is not like learning a language where being below a certain age is of huge benefit. In English what is taught is not the language but literacy in the language.

The English course for the whole of secondary school fails to affect literacy levels. 7% enter Second level education with reading any writing problems and 5-6 years later 7% leave with reading/writing problems.

Again you could argue that this need not be the case but then we are back to Reform or Optional argument.

The reason I don't think agree with this is that English classes are not the same as foreign language classes. You are already fluent in English because you live in a country where that is the primary spoken language. Your ability to spell and form sentences is of immediate practical benefit outside of school. Irish will only ever be that way for a tiny minority. For every one else, as soon as they leave school, they start forgetting whatever they may once have learned.

That dosent address the lack of anything practical being learned in the last 2 years of English in school. There is nothing of practical use learned in English so why is it compulsory, Where is the justification.

Therefore, concentrate resources:
a) On the years when language learning is most effective, i.e. the primary level and
b) on those who have a bit of aptitude and enthusiasm in later years.

I still haven't seen any arguments against these principles on this thread.

It is true that the early years are important for language acquisition, Read the reform policy advocated by CnaG, They specifically include increased exposure to Irish in primary education for that reason.

On the second point, I don't see how it being Optional is more benifical to it being Compulsory.

gimme5minutes · 02-12-2010 8:42am

SkepticOne wrote: »

English you need for day to day living. You need to be fairly fluent in reading and writing to get by in society.

Irish should be optional, and English should be optional too after junior cert. Anybody who has made it past junior cert (ie the vast majority of the population) already has learned more than enough English for day to day living. Analysing some more poems and practising creative writing are not essential for day to day living.

A lot get to 5th year without a huge amount of literacy but this is something that can still be taught. Adults late in life can be taught to read and write and it is a valuable skill. I have seen statistics that say that 20% of adults in Ireland are not functionally literate. And even those who are reasonably literate can benefit from further training. Therefore I would keep it.

20% of adults are functionally illiterate because a large % of the people 55 years old+ used to leave off school after junior cert or after primary school (even before finishing primary school in some cases) 40 years ago. It certainly isn't the case that the younger generations are 20% illiterate. Even your average scanger these days is functionally literate.

The only difference between English and Irish is that there are plenty of real world jobs and applications for people who have studied English to a high level. Whereas Irish is only useful for meaningless state-backed 'made-up' jobs. Both of them should be optional.

Kiki10 · 02-12-2010 9:30am

Irish is a language, which can be understood in 3 months if you live in an Irish speaking area. You can be fluent if you live there longer than 6 months. Years of expensive time wasting in school has proved to be useless. Its time to teach Irish at NO cost [we don't charge our children to be Irish] in Saturday schools where a day can be spent learning how to live Irish. No child on earth learns there mother tongue through conjugating verbs, they learn it arguing with siblings demanding from moms and messing around with Friends. As long as we don't talk to each other in Irish we wont pass it to our kids

cyclopath2001 · 02-12-2010 9:33am

deise go deo wrote: »

It was the choice of parents who wanted their Kids tought through Irish. Why?

Your statement was misleading as it gave the impression that the GaelScoil was demanded by all parents in Rathoath and not a small minority as you now admit.

deise go deo wrote: »

Read the reform policy advocated by CnaG, They specifically include increased exposure to Irish in primary education for that reason.

I think we need to take a closer look at CNaG and its objectives, according to their website:

Conradh na Gaeilge is the democratic forum for the Irish-speaking community and promotes the language throughout the whole of Ireland and around the world.
Its main aim is to reinstate the Irish language as the common tongue of Ireland.

I cannot recall any example from the past where a whole country has changed its language. The organisation itself is only democratic in the sense that its membership and policies are set by people who subscribe to the above ideal. In any other way, it is undemocratic as it callously ignores the language choice of almost all of the population of Ireland.

In practice, it is an irresponsible lobby group that bullies political parties, using the 'Irish Card' into adopting hugely wasteful and expensive plans (compulsory Irish, the Official Languages Act, subsidised TV and newspapers for Irish enthusiasts), regardless of the economic logic, to progress its goal of converting the majority English-speaking population to Irish speaking. If it were a political party, it would have to be accountable for where the money would be found to fund its plans and it would have to justify taking the money away from other things, such as hospitals and care for the elderly or generation of foreign income.

deise go deo wrote: »

]There are more Jobs here that require Irish than any other second language, Why these jobs exist dose not take away from their existence.

Tell that to the IMF and the bond markets.

deise go deo · 02-12-2010 9:46am

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Your statement was misleading as it gave the impression that the GaelScoil was demanded by all parents in Rathoath and not a small minority as you now admit.

Small minority? There is widespread support for a gaelscoil in this area, That is blatently obvious, Have you any evidence that there is desire for an English medium school? No you dont but that dosent stop you making ridiculous jibes about the local parents choices dose it.:rolleyes:

I think we need to take a closer look at CNaG and its objectives, according to their website:

So? Its the Gaelic League, What do you expect?

I cannot recall any example from the past where a whole country has changed its language. The organisation itself is only democratic in the sense that its membership and policies are set by people who subscribe to the above ideal. In any other way, it is undemocratic as it callously ignores the language choice of almost all of the population of Ireland.

Well lets see, FInland has, Israel has, and in case you have forgoten IRELAND has.:rolleyes:
How exactly is it a 'Choice' when there is only one option for the majority to chose?

In practice, it is an irresponsible lobby group that bullies political parties, using the 'Irish Card' into adopting hugely wasteful and expensive plans (compulsory Irish, the Official Languages Act, subsidised TV and newspapers for Irish enthusiasts), regardless of the economic logic, to progress its goal of converting the majority English-speaking population to Irish speaking. If it were a political party, it would have to be accountable for where the money would be found to fund its plans and it would have to justify taking the money away from other things, such as hospitals and care for the elderly or generation of foreign income.

If you are going to be going areound making rediculus arguments like this then I am wasting my time with you.

Tell that to the IMF and the bond markets.

:rolleyes:

When you are ready to make a reasonable argument, with evidence to back yourself up, I will answer you but until then I am going to just ignore you.

The Status Of Irish.

Comments