The Irish language is failing.

Iwasfrozen · 10-06-2015 01:58PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Why all the talk of religion? It's not like irish and religion are interchangeable.

They both are a waste of school resources and both belong to a previous era.

Mumha · 10-06-2015 02:34PM

Dughorm wrote: »

I totally agree most people don't use the language after they finish school. nor do most people use the poetry and drama they learned in English either.

But it still forms part of a rounded education which they can use as much or as little as they wish.

Perhaps the positivity comes later. I enjoy irish more now than I did in school despite the fact I know less now than I did then. I enjoy engaging with the culture, I find it meaningful.

There's certainly a case for looking at the use of poetry and drama within the English syllabus as well, but the study of English is vital to the future of our young people. You just can't say that about Irish. Even you see Irish as part of a "rounded" education, and even if that were true, the core problem is that it's compulsory in secondary and has too big a place in primary.

FunLover18 · 10-06-2015 04:47PM

Dughorm wrote:

It depends on what you view education for - poetry etc... teach students critique and analysis and students should be capable of it - but your argument was about practicality and what gets used every day. Plenty of subjects teach students critique and analysis, doesn't require mandatory LC English on your criteria.

As I mentioned earlier students are not required to study either English or Maths at LC level. I wasn't justifying English being mandatory (which it isn't) was merely saying why English can afford to spend time on poetry and drama and why it's useful to students. Irish can be used to develop analysis and critique but only when students are at the right level ( I think we can agree on that).

Dughorm wrote:

Regarding whether the conversational class is unnecessary and whether students should be skilled enough in the language to handle the poetry, I happened to be but it would be arrogant to assume that everyone is.

I think anyone who wants to be should be after 10+ years of study. I did ordinary level Irish at LC and we were still conjugating verbs, that's not down to intelligence or ability, it's down to a lack of interest.

Dughorm wrote:

So many people say they can't hold, and could never hold, a basic conversation in the language - I think that's tragic after all the time invested in it. Topics could be expanded based on the current oral exam.

It is tragic but that's a problem at primary level not secondary. If you improved the teaching at primary level to be more conversational then there should be no need to keep it mandatory at LC, because the students who are interested would be up to scratch. You could keep your optional prose and poetry class and the students who willing and capable can choose to do it.

briany · 10-06-2015 05:01PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think anyone who wants to be should be after 10+ years of study. I did ordinary level Irish at LC and we were still conjugating verbs, that's not down to intelligence or ability, it's down to a lack of interest.

I think, if you've ever seen the film 'Office Space', Peter's little speech to the Bobs about his cubicle job, you could apply a lot of what he says to Irish class.

"And then (after arriving) I just sorta space out for about 40 minutes."

"Eh?! Space out?!"

"Yeah, I just stare at my desk....but it looks like I'm working. I'd say, in a given week of Irish classes, I only do about 15 minutes real, actual work."

dlouth15 · 10-06-2015 05:06PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Why all the talk of religion? It's not like irish and religion are interchangeable.

Doesn't that depend on your philosophy of education?

Some think Irish is essential to a rounded eduction. Others think religion is essential.

In the sense that neither group feels the need to justify their opinion, Irish and Religion can be considered interchangeable.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 06:03PM

briany wrote: »

Some people view them the same, in that they're both leftovers of Holy Catholic, Patriot Ireland. That their role in education is outdated and doesn't reflect the modern reality.

I think that's a real pity that people insist on conflating what are two wholly distinct aspects of life. Plenty of people from "Holy Catholic, Patriot Ireland" didn't have Irish either I think we discussed earlier.

Anyone whose philosophy of education respects difference and encourages inclusion can see that Irish can be used as a tool for this. Irish is simply there to make your own of it, it is not owned by any one group in society.

Are these people you're referring to going to have difficulty celebrating the centenary celebrations over the next few years because they conflate history and identity with religion and politics? More's the pity if that's the case.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 06:07PM

dlouth15 wrote: »

Doesn't that depend on your philosophy of education?

Some think Irish is essential to a rounded eduction. Others think religion is essential.

In the sense that neither group feels the need to justify their opinion, Irish and Religion can be considered interchangeable.

Sorry, not catching your use of logic here tbh - I've substituted some words in the same sentences to show you how this doesn't make sense:

Some think Beef is essential to a rounded diet. Others think Fish is essential.

In the sense that neither group feels the need to justify their opinion, Beef and Fish can be considered interchangeable

Mumha · 10-06-2015 06:23PM

Dughorm wrote: »

I think that's a real pity that people insist on conflating what are two wholly distinct aspects of life. Plenty of people from "Holy Catholic, Patriot Ireland" didn't have Irish either I think we discussed earlier.

Anyone whose philosophy of education respects difference and encourages inclusion can see that Irish can be used as a tool for this. Irish is simply there to make your own of it, it is not owned by any one group in society.

Are these people you're referring to going to have difficulty celebrating the centenary celebrations over the next few years because they conflate history and identity with religion and politics? More's the pity if that's the case.

However both are throwbacks to the times when both the Catholic Church and the Irish lobby had undue influence over our education system. They are still powerful enough to block anything that reduces their influence any further.

Just like my post earlier about the man voting no in the Divorce referendum because he feared his wife would leave him, so he'd rather stay in a loveless sham marriage. Thus it is with these two subjects. There's a complete lack of honesty, and they prefer to imprison Irish children in relics of the past, rather than admit reality.

Mumha · 10-06-2015 06:24PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Sorry, not catching your use of logic here tbh - I've substituted some words in the same sentences to show you how this doesn't make sense:

Some think Beef is essential to a rounded diet. Others think Fish is essential.

In the sense that neither group feels the need to justify their opinion, Beef and Fish can be considered interchangeable

Neither Beef nor Fish are compulsory though !

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 06:27PM

Mumha wrote: »

However both are throwbacks to the times when both the Catholic Church and the Irish lobby had undue influence over our education system. They are still powerful enough to block anything that reduces their influence any further.

Just like my post earlier about the man voting no in the Divorce referendum because he feared his wife would leave him, so he'd rather stay in a loveless sham marriage. Thus it is with these two subjects. There's a complete lack of honesty, and they prefer to imprison Irish children in relics of the past, rather than admit reality.

Not really.... Irish well pre-dated the early 20th century "cultural revolution" you're referring to.

I have nothing against anyone who has an issue with political and institutional power structures of past or present Ireland but to claim that this is linked to learning Irish is a fallacy.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 06:32PM

Mumha wrote: »

Neither Beef nor Fish are compulsory though !

Eating is though! Having a healthy diet is only compulsory if one in a boarding school, it's optional outside of that. What constitutes a healthy diet depends on ones philosophy of food. :P

dlouth15 · 10-06-2015 07:34PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Sorry, not catching your use of logic here tbh - I've substituted some words in the same sentences to show you how this doesn't make sense:

Some think Beef is essential to a rounded diet. Others think Fish is essential.

In the sense that neither group feels the need to justify their opinion, Beef and Fish can be considered interchangeable

If no one was able to justify on dietary grounds why either of these were essential and it was also clear that others seemed to be able to get by perfectly well without either, then in a sense they would be interchangeable. Both would be superfluous - something that you could have if you chose to have it but not something you should be compelled to eat.

Basically if you are going to insist that people eat something the onus is on you to justify that on dietary grounds.

Likewise if you are going to insist that everyone learn something in school the onus is on you to justify it on educational grounds.

dlouth15 · 10-06-2015 07:40PM

Two arguments so far.

1. If you do not have Irish you are not truly Irish (tippertop)

2. If you do not have Irish you are not properly educated (Dughorm).

Both of these are really the same argement. The problem is that neither can exlain why. All they can do is repeat themselves.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 07:58PM

dlouth15 wrote: »

2. If you do not have Irish you are not properly educated (Dughorm).

Except that's not my argument. Sure that argument is obviously false. Plenty of people are properly educated and don't know a word of Irish.

I just think it's reasonable to educate our children in our national languages.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 08:00PM

dlouth15 wrote: »

If no one was able to justify on dietary grounds why either of these were essential and it was also clear that others seemed to be able to get by perfectly well without either, then in a sense they would be interchangeable. Both would be superfluous - something that you could have if you chose to have it but not something you should be compelled to eat.

Basically if you are going to insist that people eat something the onus is on you to justify that on dietary grounds.

Likewise if you are going to insist that everyone learn something in school the onus is on you to justify it on educational grounds.

"On educational grounds" is just a synonym for philosophy of education. I've already explained mine. What's yours?

Zen65 · 10-06-2015 08:01PM

Dughorm wrote: »

I just think it's reasonable to educate our children in our national languages.

Why?

What function does it serve?

FunLover18 · 10-06-2015 08:07PM

Dughorm wrote:

I just think it's reasonable to educate our children in our national languages.

Just to be clear we are agreed that Irish should be taught in primary school. But there is nothing "reasonable" about insisting that students MUST continue that education through to LC. It is reasonable to offer them the option to do so.

dlouth15 · 10-06-2015 08:08PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Except that's not my argument. Sure that argument is obviously false. Plenty of people are properly educated and don't know a word of Irish.

You said: I just think it's reasonable to educate our children in our national languages.

"There's no cover - being able to converse in all the national languages is vital in my book to getting a rounded education in this country."

So if you don't converse in Irish you haven't had a rounded education. How is that not your argument? The problem is that you aren't able to justify the statement on educational grounds.

Grayson · 10-06-2015 08:15PM

Dughorm wrote: »

I think that's a real pity that people insist on conflating what are two wholly distinct aspects of life. Plenty of people from "Holy Catholic, Patriot Ireland" didn't have Irish either I think we discussed earlier.

Anyone whose philosophy of education respects difference and encourages inclusion can see that Irish can be used as a tool for this. Irish is simply there to make your own of it, it is not owned by any one group in society.

Are these people you're referring to going to have difficulty celebrating the centenary celebrations over the next few years because they conflate history and identity with religion and politics? More's the pity if that's the case.

It was written into the constitution that the catholic church was the national religion. The constitution originally had a bit that says the church had a special place in Ireland. You can't deny that Catholicism isn't/wasn't a huge part of the state for a very long time.

Bayberry · 10-06-2015 08:27PM

Zen65 wrote: »

Why?

What function does it serve?

What function does Shakespeare or poetry serve? For that matter, what function does any mathemathics beyond basic arithmetic serve for 90% of people? When was the last time that you needed to know the volume of a sphere or the area of a trangle?

People say that kids should be learning French or German or Chinese instead of Irish, yet nobody seems to be interested in setting up the French, German or Chinese equivalent of Gaelscoil, and nobody seriously argues that pupils who go to Gaelscoileanna are in any way educationally disadvantaged, if anything they are seen to have an edge, especially in languages.

The success of Gaelscoileanna (from an educational outcome point of view) is all the proof that anyone should need that learning Irish shouldn't be a waste of time. The only valid argument for not making every single National school in the country a Gaelscoil is the resource issue - we just don't have the teachers.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 08:37PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

Just to be clear we are agreed that Irish should be taught in primary school. But there is nothing "reasonable" about insisting that students MUST continue that education through to LC. It is reasonable to offer them the option to do so.

Is that your opinion on English and Maths as well, which for all intents and purposes are mandatory as well?

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 08:39PM

Grayson wrote: »

It was written into the constitution that the catholic church was the national religion. The constitution originally had a bit that says the church had a special place in Ireland. You can't deny that Catholicism isn't/wasn't a huge part of the state for a very long time.

But I wasn't? I'm not the person who dragged the constitution into this discussion. I just don't see it as relevant. The irish language is not a religion nor bound to any one religion.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 08:43PM

dlouth15 wrote: »

"There's no cover - being able to converse in all the national languages is vital in my book to getting a rounded education in this country."

So if you don't converse in Irish you haven't had a rounded education. How is that not your argument? The problem is that you aren't able to justify the statement on educational grounds.

your interpretation of my argument makes it appear that I think irish should be part of the world's education and that people are somehow uneducated or not properly educated without it.... not at all.

A rounded irish education includes education in the national languages. that's all it's not like I'm judging any person's command of the language

Grayson · 10-06-2015 08:46PM

Dughorm wrote: »

But I wasn't? I'm not the person who dragged the constitution into this discussion. I just don't see it as relevant. The irish language is not a religion nor bound to any one religion.

I do think it was all bound together in what the nationalists considered an Irish identity.

Bayberry · 10-06-2015 08:54PM

Grayson wrote: »

It was written into the constitution that the catholic church was the national religion. The constitution originally had a bit that says the church had a special place in Ireland. You can't deny that Catholicism isn't/wasn't a huge part of the state for a very long time.

People go on about the Catholic Church like it was something foreign that was imposed on us.

Unlike many other countries (especially in the English speaking world, where Irish and Italian nuns, priests and bishops were imported in huge numbers), the Catholic Church in Ireland was run by and for Irish people by Irish People. Irish people born and reared in Ireland went on to become the priests and bishops that their families, their friends, their communities and Irish society in general expected them to be.

The "Special Position" of the Catholic Church wasn't "imposed" on the people - when Bunreacht n hÉireann was ratified by the Irish people (56.5% to 43.5%) - the main opposition to that article was from people who felt that it didn't go far enough in recognizing the Catholic Church! If anything, that article was considered quite liberal by International standards - nobody else in Europe at the time was giving explicit recognition to the Jewish faith, for a start. When that reference was removed in 1972 (with 84% approval), it wasn't because Ireland had become cast off some imaginary Catholic shackles, it was because a population that was still very comfortable with it's traditional sense of itself as largely Catholic, agreed that it didn't serve any useful purpose, and wasn't needed. It was absolutely not seen as an attack on Catholicism, or the role of the Catholic Church in Irish life in general.

The Wikipedia article on the 5th Amendment gives a decent overview, (though it might wreck the heads of some more "modern" thinkers, who are convinced that their grandparents were all feeeble minded people who were tterly incapable of thinking for themselves, and were brainwashed into abject obedience to an overweening foreign power)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

dr.fuzzenstein · 10-06-2015 09:00PM

briany wrote: »

I think, if you've ever seen the film 'Office Space', Peter's little speech to the Bobs about his cubicle job, you could apply a lot of what he says to Irish class.

"And then (after arriving) I just sorta space out for about 40 minutes."

"Eh?! Space out?!"

"Yeah, I just stare at my desk....but it looks like I'm working. I'd say, in a given week of Irish classes, I only do about 15 minutes real, actual work."

It's not that I'm lazy, I just don't care.

Dughorm · 10-06-2015 09:04PM

Grayson wrote: »

I do think it was all bound together in what the nationalists considered an Irish identity.

Are these people "in power" today? Have they been in years? if you read contemporary irish poetry you would be (pleasantly?) surprised I suspect!

Mandatory irish ensures equal opportunities for everyone to engage with the language no matter their identity or identities!

Iwasfrozen · 10-06-2015 09:08PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Mandatory irish ensures equal opportunities for everyone to engage with the language no matter their identity or identities!

Optional Irish would also ensure equal opportunities for everyone to engage with the language no matter their identity or identities. This isn't an argument for mandatory Irish.

Carlos Orange · 10-06-2015 09:12PM

Dughorm wrote: »

Mandatory irish ensures equal opportunities for everyone to engage with the language whether they want to or not!

FTFY

K4t · 10-06-2015 09:17PM

Bayberry wrote: »

What function does Shakespeare or poetry serve? For that matter, what function does any mathemathics beyond basic arithmetic serve for 90% of people? When was the last time that you needed to know the volume of a sphere or the area of a trangle?

Many of the themes of the tv shows and movies we watch can be traced back to Shakespeare's works, and much of the vernacular we use everyday was coined by the Bard. It's not so much about the act itself of finding the volume and area of the sphere and triangle respectively, but rather the knowing that they exist, what they are, their uses etc. That knowledge is important and valuable.

The success of Gaelscoileanna (from an educational outcome point of view) is all the proof that anyone should need that learning Irish shouldn't be a waste of time. The only valid argument for not making every single National school in the country a Gaelscoil is the resource issue - we just don't have the teachers.

It's not proof of anything of the sort. It is proof that many parents send their kids to a Gaelscoil to get an advantage in Irish, or because the school might have a better reputation than other schools nearby, or because they place importance on their kids knowing the Irish language. That's their choice, but it should be a CHOICE.

The Irish language is failing.

Comments