Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Schools want to drop LC physics, chemistry, economics

1356789

Comments

  • #62
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Mountainlad wrote: »
    The growth in the amount of students doing third-level science courses would suggest otherwise

    That's down to the growth in supply really. There's been no increase in TCD or UCD except for points. Also generally one only has to have done one science subject to get into a general science course. Quite a few people in my course, including myself, were badly caught out thinking LC biology would be useful for 3rd level biology, chemistry would have been far more useful.


  • #63
    Mountainlad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,851 ✭✭✭Mountainlad


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Then you end up getting too many people applying for a select range of courses amongst a limited number of schools which will require some form of rating system / interview stage to select successful candidates. Which cuts on the availability of any courses that get dropped from schools.

    Do you? Because people do already do this, and I'm not aware of that happening. I'm not advocating they get dropped from schools by the way, the opposite in fact.


  • #64
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    You could have made your point just as easily without throwing the dig in at the end. It was an utterly pointless jab that makes you look like a smart arsed tool.
    It's a very tame dig.
    The simple fact is that 90% of our schools are run by the Church and the Leaving Certificate syllabus has **** all to do with the fact that because the Church has this control over education, the majority of children in the country continue & will continue to be educated under a Catholic doctrine that includes bringing those children through the religious ceremonies of Communion & Confirmation.

    If that is not teaching Catholicism, then what the hell is?
    Can you stop trying to appeal to popular opinion? This thread is about the Leaving Cert. Not about Primary Schools.

    The simple fact of the matter (That you either did not know or ignored) is that LC Religion can quite feasibly have nothing whatsoever to do with Catholicism.
    wonderfulname wrote: »
    And the last LC religion paper I did the calculations on you could easily get a C2 at honours level without straying from Catholicism, but that's beside the point, as I'm sure you're well aware feck all students study religion towards an exam, instead many go through the schools own "religion" class, a ridiculous exercise which has no place in our education system.
    My non-exam "religion" class involved learning about the Rwandan genocide and Plato. It certainly had some value.


  • #65
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    bluewolf wrote: »
    So glad I didn't have religion in school

    I did but wouldnt attend the classes in 6th year, if they want to teach the history of religion then fine, its important to know, incorporate it into the history classes not a seperate class at the expense of something else. the religion classes i did go to were a doss, either the teacher stuck on a film not relating to religion at all or spent the hour correcting tests from other classes while we just chatted to ourselves.


  • #66
    Mountainlad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,851 ✭✭✭Mountainlad


    amacachi wrote: »
    That's down to the growth in supply really. There's been no increase in TCD or UCD except for points. Also generally one only has to have done one science subject to get into a general science course. Quite a few people in my course, including myself, were badly caught out thinking LC biology would be useful for 3rd level biology, chemistry would have been far more useful.

    And that would be my point, that if there has been a rise in the demand for science courses (which there has), then surely more second level students must be studying them?


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    token56
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,703 ✭✭✭token56


    benway wrote: »
    Look, I caught one!

    Not 100% serious in that ... although, the a priori mathematical reasoning is often based on unsustainable assumptions about human nature, particularly neoclassical economics, and especially the homo economicus myth. Also, I think that voguish economic theories are more derived from political reality than scientific truth. Agree 100% with this:

    http://www.iasc-culture.org/publications_article_2010_Summer_mirowski.php

    In truth, I don't think that any subjects should be dropped, but this is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the government's approach to deficit-reduction by cutting, rather than making a serious attempt to increase revenues.

    Just so you know I'm not an economist or even did economics in leaving cert in case that's what you thought.

    The main point I was trying to get across was that the work done in the field of economics is not only useful within its own field but in others. I agree much of the mathematical reasoning would require various assumptions but I can't claim to know anything about the validity of those assumptions with respect to economics, but knowing those assumptions the same mathematical reasoning can be applied or modified for use in other fields. As such I certainly don't think its a subject which should be dropped and I would not equate its usefulness on par with religion or pseudo-science.


  • #68
    Duggys Housemate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭Duggys Housemate


    prinz wrote: »
    It did in my school, dropping that would have been a disaster as it was one of the only classes I had where students were encouraged to think for themselves and contribute rather than 'open your book to page x, this is what we're doing now'..
    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    My "religion" class involved learning about the Rwandan genocide and Plato. It certainly had some value.

    My religious education ( late 80s/90s) was taken by left leaning teachers who talked little about religion, it was a civics class. We did get some Catholic magazine from South America, which, at the time was very left wing and anti-American. In fact I would suggest that a lot of anti-Americanism comes from that kind of teaching. Never once did the (non-religious) teachers who gave this class mention homosexuality or any such.

    The Catholic "control" of education system is massively over-estimated, largely by people who were in fact educated to a much less stringent degree in the last decade, or so, than the supposedly more religious schools prior to 1995. If in doubt, look at the leaving cert, then and now.

    Catholic schools largely teach the curriculum, and they have had long academic standards than techs, or multi-faiths. Mess with that at your peril. Religion can go, but I wouldn't lose the other attributes of the schools.


  • #69
    foxyboxer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭foxyboxer


    A thread about the Irish Education System?

    Urge to rant rising.


  • #70
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    It's a very tame dig.


    Tame dig or not, there really was no need for it - you are more than capable of making your point without throwing one in.


  • #71
    aidan24326
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,925 ✭✭✭aidan24326


    Aquila wrote: »
    Is anyone genuinely surprised?
    It's Ireland where long term planning is frowned upon

    Long term planning doesn't exist because the people in power have no long term interest beyond the next election, beyond keeping their own fat arses firmly planted in those cushy Dail seats.


    mikemac1 wrote: »
    The best and most famous economists in the land showed themselves up as fools

    Not all of them to be fair. Those who did cry foul were dismissed as negative whingers. Or told to go top themselves by Bertie. And economists and politicians alike were being lied to and mislead by the banks until eventually the game was up. But we digress a little.

    Anyway more on-topic for schools to be talking of dropping science subjects is ludicrous. Our school curriculum is bad enough without doing that.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Duggys Housemate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭Duggys Housemate


    I have to say that that Religion exam is pretty good. Starts off well for sure.

    Outline how the Sophists in ancient Greece contributed to the development of philosophy.
    (40 marks) Compare the way in which questions about the meaning of life
    are addressed in two myths from ancient times that you have studied. (40 marks)
    Question 2. Answer a) and b).
    a) The development of non-religious communal values can be traced back to moments such as the rise of humanism, existentialism etc.
    Profile how any two such moments contributed to the development of non-religious communal values. (40 marks)
    b) Examine the role polytheism played in the founding story of one monotheistic world religion
    that you have studied. (40 marks)

    Thats all good. Its hard to tell whether it is rote learning, or not. Depends on the teacher, and how often they change the questions.


  • #73
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    My non-exam "religion" class involved learning about the Rwandan genocide and Plato. It certainly had some value.
    And for others it involved learning Catholic doctrine, do you really think that having x amount of time dedicated to "religion" with no set learning outcomes/study guides or even just general rules as to what constitutes appropriate tuition in the area is a good idea in a state where the vast majority of schools are under the patronage of religious institutions? You shouldn't let your own experience numb you to common sense.


  • #74
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    If anything, i'd say the strongest case can be made for making LC Irish optional. At present, tens of thousands of students are forced to take the subject and of them very few will actually use the language after they leave the exam hall.

    Financially, that's:
    • Two years worth of teaching time being paid for.
    • Almost 50,000 written papers (And contingency papers)
    • Almost 50,000 listening papers (And contingency papers)
    • Almost 50,000 oral exams with examiners being paid for
    • Hundreds of examiners and supervisors to mark and check the written and listening papers
    • Three LC exam sessions across the country with all the associated costs involved with carrying out an exam

    That's quite a lot of money to pay for what is essentially useless education. If they made LC Irish optional and downsized it to meet actual demand, it would definitely free up resources for students to be able to study more useful subjects.


  • #75
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    OP mentions religion and along come the Satanists to make monkeys out of us.

    In truth what should happen is the poorest performing teachers should be given the heave ho and the subjects they teach should be cut.

    Leaving cert English is about as usefull as any of the subjects mentioned. I'd rather see my kids leave school with some kind of engineering or science diploma.

    Waaaaaaaaaay too much BS in the LC.


  • #76
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    You shouldn't let your own experience numb you to common sense.

    Perhaps you should take your own advice.


  • #77
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    If anything, i'd say the strongest case can be made for making LC Irish optional. At present, tens of thousands of students are forced to take the subject and of them very few will actually use the language after they leave the exam hall.

    Financially, that's:
    • Two years worth of teaching time being paid for.
    • Almost 50,000 written papers (And contingency papers)
    • Almost 50,000 listening papers (And contingency papers)
    • Almost 50,000 oral exams with examiners being paid for
    • Hundreds of examiners and supervisors to mark and check the written and listening papers
    • Three LC exam sessions across the country with all the associated costs involved with carrying out an exam

    That's quite a lot of money to pay for what is essentially a complete waste of time. If they made LC Irish optional and downsized it to meet actual demand, it would definitely free up resources for students to be able to study more useful subjects.

    Bullet points. Extra marks for effort.


  • #78
    BackScrub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 353 ✭✭BackScrub


    My main concern is that the department of education don't do anything completely crazy like introducing IT as a subject.

    Fingers crossed they maintain their current level of sanity. Teaching ECDL over 5 years is enough progress to be making in a century.


  • #79
    spurious
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 27,498 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    BackScrub wrote: »
    My main concern is that the department of education don't do anything completely crazy like introducing IT as a subject.

    Fingers crossed they maintain their current level of sanity. Teaching ECDL over 5 years is enough progress to be making in a century.

    They already have IT as an elective in the Applied Leaving Cert..


  • #80
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    If anything, i'd say the strongest case can be made for making LC Irish optional. At present, tens of thousands of students are forced to take the subject and of them very few will actually use the language after they leave the exam hall.

    The other side of the coin is that there is an onus on the state to preserve the language, and by demoting it to an optional status will mean that many people (including those that actually like the language) will drop it. Languages are just difficult in nature as a subject.

    If the goal of the state with respect to the language is to preserve it, and assist it's growth - then relegating it to a choice subject simply won't do that. In an ideal world - everyone who liked the language would keep it on - but in the real world, many would drop it because the curriculum is very difficult.

    I would argue in favour of a non-tested conversational class being mandatory for the leaving cert, while poetry and the likes could be optional. At least that way, you're actually encouraging 'use' of the language. There's a lot more going on than the obligatory/optional debate with the Irish language. Before that ever takes place, the curriculum needs to be completely revamped.


  • #81
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    bluewolf wrote: »
    If it were, students might actually have a full choice of subjects instead of this messing around
    Really, under a fully privatised system who do you think would step in and take control of the running of the schools?? Perhaps the same organisation already in place, the Catholic church, with even more power to control the curriculum.

    Our schools aren't a testing ground for the whims of whatever multinational organisation reckons we should be studying.

    If the correct skills of learning are taught from an early age then it matters little what a pupil studied at LC level. I'm a scientist, but it would be a shame if creative arts and humanities subjects were dropped in favour of more 'profitable' ones.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Leaving cert English is about as usefull as any of the subjects mentioned.
    Oh it's always good for kids to learn about irony.
    prinz wrote: »
    Perhaps you should take your own advice.
    Perhaps you shouldn't make ridiculous assumptions.


  • #83
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    Make irish optional and introduce a useful language as compulsory instead. Teach religion as part of History. Most schools also have an art/french/german compulsory module. Ditch that too. So you'll be left with 6 compulsory subjects which is all you count anyway.


  • #84
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    Tame dig or not, there really was no need for it - you are more than capable of making your point without throwing one in.
    I apologise. But I still stand by the rest of what I said.
    BackScrub wrote: »
    My main concern is that the department of education don't do anything completely crazy like introducing IT as a subject.
    The unfortunate truth is that a lot of people would end up failing. As it stands, a lot of people go on to do computer courses in university with no clear appreciation of what's involved. I can only imagine the amount of 15 year old "Facebook experts" going on to do a LC "Computers" subject thinking it will be a piece of cake and then failing miserably when they realise what working with computers actually entails.
    Fingers crossed they maintain their current level of sanity. Teaching ECDL over 5 years is enough progress to be making in a century.
    The ECDL is as much of a computer qualification as is passing an online "How much do you know about driving?" quiz on Facebook a driving licence.


  • #85
    token56
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,703 ✭✭✭token56


    Just out curiosity how exactly is the education budget distributed and its usage monitored does anyone know. Obviously a large portion of it goes to wages, but aside from that I presume each school gets a fixed budget from the department depending probably on size etc. Is this assumption correct? and is it then up to each school to spend it as it sees fit or its usage monitored by the department?


  • #86
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    physics ya- prob the most important subject and maths

    accounting ffs:pac:


  • #87
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Perhaps you shouldn't make ridiculous assumptions.

    You made remarks about some people's experiences and are drawing conclusions. Others make remarks about their experiences and draw conclusions and then you tell them to "You shouldn't let your own experience numb you to common sense".. Where's the ridiculous assumption?


  • #88
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    dlofnep wrote: »
    The other side of the coin is that there is an onus on the state to preserve the language, and by demoting it to an optional status will mean that many people (including those that actually like the language) will drop it. Languages are just difficult in nature as a subject.

    If the goal of the state with respect to the language is to preserve it, and assist it's growth - then relegating it to a choice subject simply won't do that. In an ideal world - everyone who liked the language would keep it on - but in the real world, many would drop it because the curriculum is very difficult.

    I would argue in favour of a non-tested conversational class being mandatory for the leaving cert, while poetry and the likes could be optional. At least that way, you're actually encouraging 'use' of the language. There's a lot more going on than the obligatory/optional debate with the Irish language. Before that ever takes place, the curriculum needs to be completely revamped.
    "Preserving a language" doesn't make much sense to me.

    Hundreds of thousands of languages have existed over time. Those that were the best (As in easiest to use and most importantly most universally understood) survived and those that didn't meet the mark eventually died out.

    A language is only a means to an end. It is a tool used in communication. If it fails in that regard (I.e. It is difficult to use and not universally understood) it should be left to fizzle out naturally and should remain preserved in the history books. It certainly shouldn't be propped up at the expense of subjects of study that have no "expiry date" such as the sciences and subjects like Music, Art or Economics.


  • #89
    BackScrub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 353 ✭✭BackScrub


    spurious wrote: »
    They already have IT as an elective in the Applied Leaving Cert..

    Not in my daughter's school. I've had a few hilarious debates with the career guidance teacher. She has outlined to me a few times the importance of ECDL and the huge role it will play in my child's future.

    She wasn't accepting any of my nonsense anyway. What would I know given I only have 20 years experience as a database/application/web developer? Her 600 years filling in 2 field paper forms tops that.

    Anyway, a few of us are having our first CoderDojo meeting tonight, thank God there's an alternative to these dinosaurs.


  • #90
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Close schools altogether, get them all up on bicycles to power the country:p


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    draiochtanois
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭draiochtanois


    This post has been deleted.


Advertisement
Advertisement