Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

Coles wrote: »

What about this for a compromise. Full immersion in Irish language schooling until the age of 12 and then parents could choose whether the child continued to study it at all? Seems fair enough doesn't it?

No, no compromise. Parents have the right to protect their children from political education.

marienbad wrote: »

Well you have slightly moved the goalposts now Coles and we are now talking about pre and early schooling.

And for very good reason. It's far easier to teach children a language at a younger age. I wouldn't give up on kids who are already in secondary school, but it will certainly be difficult to change their attitude towards the language at this stage. Having said that, I would imagine that the proliferation of good Irish speaking role models has some impact.

The issues I have mentioned are central to the negative attitude that people have towards the language.

And to pretend that the teaching methodology/curriculum is anything other than a joke is just fooling yourself.

A lot of students learn the language perfectly well at the moment, so I'm inclined to look elsewhere for the problem. Admittedly I'm not a teacher and my experience of secondary school is a very distant memory, but I'd genuinely be interested in hearing your views on it.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No, no compromise. Parents have the right to protect their children from political education.

Eh? No they don't. The decision that children even have to go to school at all was a political decision. The choice of subjects was a political decision. So where are you going with your 'No Compromise'? Do you think you have a choice? If you don't like living under the Irish Constitution you could go elsewhere?

Coles wrote: »

And for very good reason. It's far easier to teach children a language at a younger age. I wouldn't give up on kids who are already in secondary school, but it will certainly be difficult to change their attitude towards the language at this stage. Having said that, I would imagine that the proliferation of good Irish speaking role models has some impact.

A lot of students learn the language perfectly well at the moment, so I'm inclined to look elsewhere for the problem. Admittedly I'm not a teacher and my experience of secondary school is a very distant memory, but I'd genuinely be interested in hearing your views on it.

Simple , teach Irish as a foreign language but that is too big an admission to make so we soldier on in this silly stupid costly culture war.

My own daughter speaks fluent Spanish French Italian and achieved this in less time than it took her to get passable Irish.

Coles wrote: »

Eh? No they don't. The decision that children even have to go to school at all was a political decision. The choice of subjects was a political decision. So where are you going with your 'No Compromise'? Do you think you have a choice? If you don't like living under the Irish Constitution you could go elsewhere?

Or change the constitution ?

Coles wrote: »

Eh? No they don't. The decision that children even have to go to school at all was a political decision. The choice of subjects was a political decision. So where are you going with your 'No Compromise'? Do you think you have a choice? If you don't like living under the Irish Constitution you could go elsewhere?

Every subject except history and irish are taught from a purely factual level. History can be fine as long as you keep to the facts (unlike my primary school where the history lessons were so one sided it's comical to think back on). But immersing kids in irish to achieve a bilingual Ireland without the parents consent is not on. Show we were the constitution requires all schools to be gaelscoils.

marienbad wrote: »

Or change the constitution ?

That would be a political decision to change the subjects so what has really changed? It's still a political choice of subjects and all that that entails.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

marienbad wrote: »

My own daughter speaks fluent Spanish French Italian and achieved this in less time than it took her to get passable Irish.

That's interesting. Do you think you gave her a good attitude towards the Irish language?

Coles wrote: »

:eek: 'compulsory'

So... you think that a child thinking that everything is compulsory (:D) is the solution...??

just a quick question: do you know anything abotu child psychology?

Lord TSC

(Putting aside the fact I couldn't disagree more about how more compulsory Irish is the way forward...)

The problem with defining "good" and "bad" attitudes towards a language is it's entirely based on personal point of view.

If parents see no point for a language, of course someone who does thinks it's a bad attitude. I don't. I see that as utter indifference, and if parents don't see the point of their kids being pushed to learn Irish, then that may be a "bad attitude" to you but it's their right as a parent to me. They are under no obligation to force their kid to learn a language simply to appease you; you've got to convince them WHY it's important to have a "good" attitude towards the language.

Telling parents they should have a good attitude simply because their child must learn a language does nothing but turn the indifference into resentment, and will be seen as a bad attitude by the language lobbyist.

Which is why I go back to this line of thinking; it's up to the person who is arguing the positives of the language to convince the person with a bad attitude to adopt a good one. Convince. Not order. So Coles, rather than tell people HOW they should promote language to their children, you need to work on WHY they should.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

So... you think that a child thinking that everything is compulsory (:D) is the solution...??

just a quick question: do you know anything abotu child psychology?

A child doesn't have a choice about 1. going to school, and 2. the stuff they learn. Therefore 'compulsory'. I'm really not sure why you think it should be any different? Sure, when the kids are 12 or 13 they could start making some preferences...

Coles wrote: »

That's interesting. Do you think you gave her a good attitude towards the Irish language?

Indeed we did, helped with her homework grinds - the lot. She developed the resentment all on her own.

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

So Coles, rather than tell people HOW they should promote language to their children, you need to work on WHY they should.

Eh? I've done that on numerous occasions over the last heap of pages. It's simple. If the child has a 'good'/positive attitude towards learning the language then they will do better at it than if they have a 'bad'/negative attitude. They will get better results at Irish, but will probably do better at school in general. A parent would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they instilled a 'bad' attitude!

This actually gets back to some of the first contributions I made on this topic. Learning Irish with a positive attitude is easier. The child will do better in school and will this will have a positive impact on their life. Win-win.

shruikan2553

People learn a language to communicate. Irish people raised with english as their first language have no reason to learn irish other than for a hobby. I have never known of any irish speakers who dont speak english. By the time people have children they have probably forgotten all about the pages they learnt to write an essay on the economy or the night they heard a noise outside so they arent much help.

marienbad wrote: »

She developed the resentment all on her own.

Do you really think so?

Coles wrote: »

Eh? I've done that on numerous occasions over the last heap of pages. It's simple. If the child has a 'good'/positive attitude towards learning the language then they will do better at it than if they have a 'bad'/negative attitude. They will get better results at Irish, but will probably do better at school in general. A parent would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they instilled a 'bad' attitude!

This actually gets back to some of the first contributions I made on this topic. Learning Irish with a positive attitude is easier. The child will do better in school and will this will have a positive impact on their life. Win-win.

Except a few people, including myself have pointed out that we wouldn't have done as well in our leaving certs if we hadn't side tracked Irish. A point you have conveniently ignored.

Coles wrote: »

Eh? I've done that on numerous occasions over the last heap of pages. It's simple. If the child has a 'good'/positive attitude towards learning the language then they will do better at it than if they have a 'bad'/negative attitude. They will get better results at Irish, but will probably do better at school in general. A parent would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they instilled a 'bad' attitude!

This actually gets back to some of the first contributions I made on this topic. Learning Irish with a positive attitude is easier. The child will do better in school and will this will have a positive impact on their life. Win-win.

With all due respect Coles , you are not really providing any answers . Just saying have a good/positive attitude dos'nt make it happen.

The key is to look for the variable. Take Irish and French , why do we have kids leaving secondary school with a better grasp of French than Irish despite being taught it for less time ?

And please don't say attitude. That is not an answer.

Coles wrote: »

Do you really think so?

I know so Coles ! You are questioning every answer given to you in good faith that dos'nt fit your worldview.

And that is the problem in a nutshell.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Except a few people, including myself have pointed out that we wouldn't have done as well in our leaving certs if we hadn't side tracked Irish. A point you have conveniently ignored.

So you were good at Irish and doing Honours and you dropped down to Pass so that you could focus on other subjects? Right? So what's your point? People do that all the time. Some drop down out of Honours Maths because it frees up time for other stuff, some drop out of Honours English... I'm really not sure what your point is?

Lord TSC

Coles wrote: »

Eh? I've done that on numerous occasions over the last heap of pages. It's simple. If the child has a 'good'/positive attitude towards learning the language then they will do better at it than if they have a 'bad'/negative attitude. They will get better results at Irish, but will probably do better at school in general. A parent would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they instilled a 'bad' attitude!

This actually gets back to some of the first contributions I made on this topic. Learning Irish with a positive attitude is easier. The child will do better in school and will this will have a positive impact on their life. Win-win.

Completely missed my point, so I'll restate it.

WHY should parents instill a positive attitude with relation to Irish? What are the benefits of learning Irish? What does a good grade in the subject lead to after they are done in school?

You're detailing how to make it easier to learn (better attitudes, etc), but not why they should seek this out. Arguing it provides better results is in direct conflict with your point earlier that education should not just be about results (and employability). Surely there should be more to investing so much time and effort into a subject than results. Furthermore, it doesn't justify keeping Irish as compulsory since in your version of events, the language being learned is incidental; it could easily be French, German, Mandarin or Klingon if the purpose is simply to do well in school.

So again I ask. WHY should parents seek to encourage their children to invest so much time into the subject? Just to get better results? To what end then?

Coles wrote: »

So you were good at Irish and doing Honours and you dropped down to Pass so that you could focus on other subjects? Right? So what's your point? People do that all the time. Some drop down out of Honours Maths because it frees up time for other stuff, some drop out of Honours English... I'm really not sure what your point is?

No I was doing ordinary Irish. My only ordinary subject. I was always bad at the language, pretty good at German but Irish was another story. My point is you claim doing poorly in Irish is an indication of overall academic weakness but I've never been described as academically weak and actually I wouldn't be were I am if I'd put the work into Irish.

marienbad wrote: »

With all due respect Coles , you are not really providing any answers . Just saying have a good/positive attitude dos'nt make it happen.

The key is to look for the variable. Take Irish and French , why do we have kids leaving secondary school with a better grasp of French than Irish despite being taught it for less time ?

And please don't say attitude. That is not an answer.

What else can it be? If it was the teachers or the curriculum or the methodology it would have been fixed by now! Seriously.

Incidently, I've never come across a discussion about people hating French or wanting it banned.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No I was doing ordinary Irish. My only ordinary subject. My point is you claim doing poorly in Irish is an indication of overall academic weakness but I've never been described as academically weak and actually I wouldn't be were I am if I'd put the work into Irish.

So what was your problem? Why did you find it difficult?

Coles wrote: »

A child doesn't have a choice about 1. going to school, and 2. the stuff they learn. Therefore 'compulsory'. I'm really not sure why you think it should be any different? Sure, when the kids are 12 or 13 they could start making some preferences...

Well, how's it working that working out with regard to your complaint of their "attitude" to the irish lanaguge?

Canard

Coles wrote: »

Do you really think so?

My dad loves Irish yet I find it a bit tedious. I developed that attitude when I realized I'd spent 14 years perfecting a language I would never use again. That's not even by choice...it's just not practical for me to use it and I'm already forgetting a lot of what I knew. I liked it in school to an extent and would have kept it on even if it had been optional, but I can't deny that forcing it on people who don't want it is completely pointless and does nothing for the language.

And the course/methodology is the entire problem with fluency. Seriously. It's awful.

Coles wrote: »

What else can it be? If it was the teachers or the curriculum or the methodology it would have been fixed by now! Seriously.

Incidently, I've never come across a discussion about people hating French or wanting it banned.

No Coles it would not have been fixed by now ! Seriously .

Any decisions made on the language and the teaching of it are too influencced by vested outside interests . And that is the problem .

And by the way no one has suggested banning Irish.