Should Philosophy and/or Politics be taught as a formal subject on the leaving cert?

Peregrine · 01-08-2013 05:14PM

Chancer3001 wrote: »

A bad teacher hardly invalidates an entire subject

Not a bad teacher at all, I think I got an A. Most people in the class got Bs.

That's all there is to the subject

The exam is 40% and the project is 60%.

In the exam, the first section is the section which contains questions on the government, elections etc. and that's just 9% of the overall mark. Section 2 involves reading 3 source papers (usually a leaflet on a charity or something) and answering questions on it, that's 21%. Section 3 is usually about organisations or events and you're given tasks like writing a letter or designing a poster or something..10%.

The books themselves have lots on leaders, the structure of government, EU, UN etc. but what comes up every year is so basic and its' such a small question.

Have a look

https://betterexaminations.ie/show?paper_id=7695&mksurl=none

Wacker The Attacker · 01-08-2013 05:36PM

Perhaps we should spend more time teaching our kids about real and relevant stuff.

Money and proper use of language would be of far greater benefit and significance.

Corvo Attano · 01-08-2013 06:14PM

CSPE is awful at teaching anything. Its common sense and famous names. The most I learned about government was the bones of how a law is passed and thats it. And that was a 30 minute video. I learned nothing else about politics here or elsewhere.

Reindeer · 01-08-2013 06:42PM

Learning philosophical argument couldn't hurt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Philosophical_arguments

JohnMearsheimer · 01-08-2013 06:54PM

The political element of CSPE is a joke. In terms of political literacy it's like teaching someone the alphabet and leaving it at that.

Foxhound38 · 01-08-2013 07:06PM

In terms of any politics class for leaving cert, I would envisage it to be loosely based on the current political science syllibus currently taught in Universities - and presumably by a Political Science graduate with a H-Dip (like any other teacher of any other discipline) as opposed to Joe Soap the PE teacher who has been drafted in to teach the kids CSPE.

For those that choose it, it would be more about the Irish system of Government, basics of the legal system, introduction to the roles and interchanges of various institutions (EU, IMF, WTO, UN etc), introduction to the basics of International Relations theories, perhaps even a political thinker or 2 like Kant, Roussau, Hume and/or Marx. It would not be about the teacher pushing their political beliefs, or the book pushing a one-sided view on the EU etc or anything like it. Political Science is essentially the study of power as a commodity (amongst other things), the idea of it being a soapbox for teachers doesn't arise as long as the curriculam is designed properly.

There's no reason what is learned in first year of Political Science in University (which is absolute basics, because it isn't taught in school) couldn't be incorporated into a Leaving Cert subject for those that choose it. It's also not rocket science - interested 15 - 18 year olds could well grasp it.

They're talking about reducing the voting age to 16 (and I'm leaning in favour of this myself), it therefore behooves the State to ensure that proper political education is available for young people in the age group.

thefasteriwalk · 01-08-2013 07:12PM

Sleepy wrote: »

A year to study Sophie's Choice would make an ideal Philosophy course for Secondary School

Do you mean Sophie's World? If so, you could definitely design a good Introduction to Philosophy TY course around it.

Karl Stein · 01-08-2013 07:36PM

What exactly is critical thinking? How do you know if you're thinking critically?

Foxhound38 · 01-08-2013 07:57PM

In terms of a Philosophy programme - teaching basic Formal Philosophical Logic (which would also be very handy for kids thinking of going on to do Computer Science or learn any sort of programming for a start!), argument structure, Ethics, theories of Rationalism and Empiricalism, again some thinkers - Spinoza, Aristotle, Habermas come to mind.

Again, this should be taught by a Philosophy graduate with a H-Dip like a teacher in any other discipline. I'm very in favour of this subject being added to the LC curriculam for those that choose to do it - Philosophy is one of those subjects that teach very transferable skills in terms of ways to think about problems that could come in very useful in a huge variety of disciplines that the student may wish to pursue post-LC, not just if they wish to continue on to do a Philosophy degree.

Czarcasm · 01-08-2013 08:13PM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

In terms of a Philosophy programme - teaching basic Formal Philosophical Logic (which would also be very handy for kids thinking of going on to do Computer Science or learn any sort of programming for a start!), argument structure, Ethics, theories of Rationalism and Empiricalism, again some thinkers - Spinoza, Aristotle, Habermas come to mind.

Again, this should be taught by a Philosophy graduate with a H-Dip like a teacher in any other discipline. I'm very in favour of this subject being added to the LC curriculam for those that choose to do it - Philosophy is one of those subjects that teach very transferable skills in terms of ways to think about problems that could come in very useful in a huge variety of disciplines that the student may wish to pursue post-LC, not just if they wish to continue on to do a Philosophy degree.

Curriculum! Jesus, before anyone starts talking about philosophy and political science for god's sake can we get the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic down first?

I'm not normally a spelling pedant, but in a thread about our education system, and I don't mean to particularly pick on you Foxhound, your post is just one example of basic spelling errors in this thread, I think it's pretty obvious before we go adding anything to the curriculum that we need to get the basics right first!

Foxhound38 · 01-08-2013 08:22PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Curriculum! Jesus, before anyone starts talking about philosophy and political science for god's sake can we get the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic down first?

I'm not normally a spelling pedant, but in a thread about our education system, and I don't mean to particularly pick on you Foxhound, your post is just one example of basic spelling errors in this thread, I think it's pretty obvious before we go adding anything to the curriculum that we need to get the basics right first!

I'm dyslexic actually - apologies for the spelling error

Czarcasm · 01-08-2013 09:17PM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

I'm dyslexic actually - apologies for the spelling error

Ah there's no need to apologise for it, I wasn't aware you were dyslexic Foxhound, but I think that being the case then you could appreciate all the more the necessity I feel for the curriculum to return to basics from primary school level up. I'm sure you're all too aware of the difficulties children with undiagnosed dyslexia face and how that difficulty can leave them struggling behind their classmates.

I think before you start teaching children or even young adults formal philosophical logic you should be sure they have a grasp of the basics first. Otherwise further study is meaningless and misunderstood.

While I think your ideas have some merit, I don't believe that they could be integrated into a general secondary school curriculum without at least laying the groundwork in primary school first, and even then it would be a very niche subject. I raised the idea of integrating more IT classes in the primary school my son attends (I'm a member of the board of management and also a computer science and mathematics grad, so I understand where you're coming from), but I was told that the department of education only sees IT as a tool, and not as a subject.

With that sort of blinkered vision, how likely do you think it is that they will ever introduce philosophy or political science as a subject in secondary school? That's even before we get into talking about providing resources to teach these subjects! It's hard enough to find teachers motivated, willing, and passionate enough about their subjects to teach the basics, let alone niche subjects like those, to a classroom of twenty students, when even earlier on in the thread we had someone describe English as "a long course about shìte nobody cares about".

I have an eight year old here who has already read through most of the literary classics (two of his favorite authors so far being Charles Dickens and Oscar Wilde), and he's downloaded the complete works of Shakespeare on his tablet to read through too.

My point being, that if you want to teach somebody a niche subject, you're best going outside the curriculum and teaching them on a one to one basis yourself outside school hours.

Robert McGrath · 01-08-2013 09:38PM

For the vast majority of the population, almost all maths in secondary school is a niche subject. 99% of people will be quite capable of excelling in their future careers by knowing how to add, subtract, divide, multiply and knowing how fractions and percentages work.

Some say that maths teaches logic, critical thinking and problem solving, which is useful to everyone. If that is the aim, then why not design a course to specifically teach these skills directly rather than hoping those skills will be an indirect by-product of maths? I simply can't believe that the basic concepts of logic could be considered more difficult to understand than, say, calculus or theorems and proofs in geometry.

By the way, and I only say this to prevent accusations that I found maths "too hard", my undergraduate degree was in maths and philosophy.

Foxhound38 · 01-08-2013 09:48PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Ah there's no need to apologise for it, I wasn't aware you were dyslexic Foxhound, but I think that being the case then you could appreciate all the more the necessity I feel for the curriculum to return to basics from primary school level up. I'm sure you're all too aware of the difficulties children with undiagnosed dyslexia face and how that difficulty can leave them struggling behind their classmates.

I think before you start teaching children or even young adults formal philosophical logic you should be sure they have a grasp of the basics first. Otherwise further study is meaningless and misunderstood.

While I think your ideas have some merit, I don't believe that they could be integrated into a general secondary school curriculum without at least laying the groundwork in primary school first, and even then it would be a very niche subject. I raised the idea of integrating more IT classes in the primary school my son attends (I'm a member of the board of management and also a computer science and mathematics grad, so I understand where you're coming from), but I was told that the department of education only sees IT as a tool, and not as a subject.

With that sort of blinkered vision, how likely do you think it is that they will ever introduce philosophy or political science as a subject in secondary school? That's even before we get into talking about providing resources to teach these subjects! It's hard enough to find teachers motivated, willing, and passionate enough about their subjects to teach the basics, let alone niche subjects like those, to a classroom of twenty students, when even earlier on in the thread we had someone describe English as "a long course about shìte nobody cares about".

I have an eight year old here who has already read through most of the literary classics (two of his favorite authors so far being Charles Dickens and Oscar Wilde), and he's downloaded the complete works of Shakespeare on his tablet to read through too.

My point being, that if you want to teach somebody a niche subject, you're best going outside the curriculum and teaching them on a one to one basis yourself outside school hours.

That's fair enough Czarcasm - and while I disagree with parts of your opinion on this issue, I can definately see where you are coming from in terms of practicalities.

As an aside, I'm also gladdened to see that you are obviously doing the parenting thing properly and more - taking an active interest by being a member of the board of management and introducing your child to the classics of literature, my hat honestly goes off to you on that front

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 01-08-2013 09:53PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

Logic = Math

Critical Thinking = English Comprehension

If you missed that, you're not doing it right.

Then most of us aren't.

The problems is, that's not what's taught in the Maths and English syllabuses. What's taught is what to say to get a good grade.

I've been saying philosophy should be taught from day one for a while now. Simple little ethical problems as oppose to religion. How to think laterally and solve problems, not using maths equations but using different apporaches. How to debate and formulate a point and get it across. The problem is, ou're going to havea generaton of kids who will actually think for themselves and say, "**** this, I'm not doing Irish/Shakespear/LC maths" and be able to tell you why. And that's the last thing a governemtn wants.

Sucette! · 01-08-2013 10:06PM

Just to add to the whole CSPE side of it, adding my experience to the previous students who've posted.

CSPE is a waste of time the way the course is now.

I completed the Junior Cert 2 years ago now, and we spent 1st-3rd year using that one class a week to work on History (as we had the same teacher for both and our SPHE class on history actually, but that's another story)

We flicked through the book, had CSPE maybe 3 times in a term (max), did the project in 2nd year and coming up to the mocks learned the politicians faces and the famous buildings and that was it.

Through common sense and being able to write 'Barak Obama' 'Enda Kenny' and 'Queen Elizabeth 2' under their faces, I got 97% in the mocks and an A in the Junior Cert.

I remember the actual exam itself, Government buildings came up and you had to label them with corresponding names, The White House, Westminster, Leinster House and Aras an Uachtarain. In the picture of The White House there was an American flag clearly in the picture, Westminster a British flag and Aras and Leinster house an Irish. Who cant just match the flags?

That's my experience anyway and I honestly can't say I learnt much.

Czarcasm · 01-08-2013 10:10PM

Robert McGrath wrote: »

For the vast majority of the population, almost all maths in secondary school is a niche subject. 99% of people will be quite capable of excelling in their future careers by knowing how to add, subtract, divide, multiply and knowing how fractions and percentages work.

Some say that maths teaches logic, critical thinking and problem solving, which is useful to everyone. If that is the aim, then why not design a course to specifically teach these skills directly rather than hoping those skills will be an indirect by-product of maths? I simply can't believe that the basic concepts of logic could be considered more difficult to understand than, say, calculus or theorems and proofs in geometry.

By the way, and I only say this to prevent accusations that I found maths "too hard", my undergraduate degree was in maths and philosophy.

The problem though with your theory is that it's too individualistic an approach. Some students have a more natural aptitude for mathematics, some have a natural aptitude for languages, some for arts, etc. The educational curriculum is intended to provide a STANDARD of education that accommodates and promotes both a child's intellectual and social development as well as their physical education.

By creating more specialised curriculums (everyone will have their own ideas about what children and young people should be learning), you will be creating a very fragmented and confusing curriculum, and as for subjects that will enable people to excel in their future careers, I would suggest that more important than the subjects themselves, would be career guidance from an early age so that those 99% of students will have a more defined career path so that they won't be playing pin the tail on the donkey with their CAO forms, only to drop out after the Christmas because they didn't like the course they chose.

Robert McGrath · 01-08-2013 10:11PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Then most of us aren't.

The problems is, that's not what's taught in the Maths and English syllabuses. What's taught is what to say to get a good grade.

I've been saying philosophy should be taught from day one for a while now. Simple little ethical problems as oppose to religion. How to think laterally and solve problems, not using maths equations but using different apporaches. How to debate and formulate a point and get it across. The problem is, ou're going to havea generaton of kids who will actually think for themselves and say, "**** this, I'm not doing Irish/Shakespear/LC maths" and be able to tell you why. And that's the last thing a governemtn wants.

This is a much better version of what I was trying to say ... Thanks Princess C.

Apart from the last couple of sentences. There's no conspiracy here, just inertia.

cloudatlas · 01-08-2013 10:22PM

From what I remember students had difficulty analysing the subtext of an english poem so I'd say introducing Aristotle, Plato, Kant and co. would be a disaster. If we had fewer subjects like the A-levels then maybe.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 01-08-2013 10:34PM

cloudatlas wrote: »

From what I remember students had difficulty analysing the subtext of an english poem so I'd say introducing Aristotle, Plato, Kant and co. would be a disaster. If we had fewer subjects like the A-levels then maybe.

Depends on how you intorduce it. If the go with philosophy in order to pass an exam, yeah - same bloody problems. If they go with the idea of actually educating (now there's an idea: God forbid!!) the kids then it'll work. If they go with the practical applications of the ideas, you'll get intelligent kids with considered ideas. Although whether people want that, as I said earlier, is debatebale.

If they jsut go with the history of philosophy and just teach philsophers and their ideas, it's doomed.

Pang · 01-08-2013 10:35PM

CSPE is a joke subject. The one class a week spent on it could be used in a much more productive way.

I think philosophy and politics would be a great addition to the timetable but not at junior certificate level. The students, well alot of them don't have the mental capacity for the content of these subjects. They would be better suited to older students.

If you have a look at the Religious Education curriculum at leaving certificate level, there is a mandatory philosophy section (Section A), where Plato, Socrates, the Sophists are taught and discussed. This section however is usually only completed by students studying Religion for examination.

I think a combined subject of ethics, morality, philosophy and politics at leaving certificate would be more effective than the normal three classes of Religion that most students are getting.

Also, I really think we need more PE in schools and more education about healthy eating, nutrition, basic life skills. I would view this as more important than classes on politics, presently.

Unfortunately, with the new pilot JC programme, PE and Home Economics will in some schools become short courses or they will be removed from the timetable. A move I am very much against.

cloudatlas · 01-08-2013 10:56PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Depends on how you intorduce it. If the go with philosophy in order to pass an exam, yeah - same bloody problems. If they go with the idea of actually educating (now there's an idea: God forbid!!) the kids then it'll work. If they go with the practical applications of the ideas, you'll get intelligent kids with considered ideas. Although whether people want that, as I said earlier, is debatebale.

If they jsut go with the history of philosophy and just teach philsophers and their ideas, it's doomed.

I would love to see something like an introduction to Justice. My fear is that classes for students in this age group that allow open discussion or group work usually become chaotic.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 01-08-2013 11:12PM

cloudatlas wrote: »

I would love to see something like an introduction to Justice. My fear is that classes for students in this age group that allow open discussion or group work usually become chaotic.

So a fai reflection of the Dail then?

Should Philosophy and/or Politics be taught as a formal subject on the leaving cert?

Comments