If any confirmation were needed that the Irish are obsessed with history, the very heated debate in recent weeks on the teaching of the subject has certainly provided it. It is hard to imagine any other school subject - with the possible exception of the Irish language - generating so much public discussion. The decision by the Minister for Education yesterday to ask the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) to review the recommendations on which subjects should form the compulsory core for Junior Certificate students will be welcomed by the many people concerned about the fate of history teaching in schools. But it should also focus attention, not just on history, but on the wider issue of overcrowding in the curriculum and which disciplines should form the core curriculum for all students.
Some of the debate in recent weeks has reflected more of an ideological or political agenda than a real exploration of the educational issues involved. What is at issue is not some revisionist plot to undermine history, but a genuine effort to put together a school curriculum which will best serve the needs of all children, both the academically bright and those whose talents are of a more practical nature. Interestingly, despite widespread concern about environmental issues, the fate of geography - affected by the same proposal - has attracted little public attention.
All students should learn the basics of their own history, local, national and international, at school. It is fundamental to their development of identity, to understanding their roots, placing themselves in time and appreciating their heritage. How best this is achieved - and whether making history compulsory for all students up to Junior Certificate level is the best approach - is another matter. Certainly, our experience with compulsory Irish has not been an entirely positive one. It is not a question of whether history should be taught, but of how best it can be done in the interests of all children.
A national debate on the broader issue of what is taught in the compulsory junior cycle of secondary education would be very welcome. With the focus now firmly on history, the opportunity presents itself to broaden out the discussion. What should be the place of science and technology in the curriculum? Should all students study a modern continental language? Is there too little emphasis on the arts? These are some of the issues raised in various documents from the NCCA and the Government's White Paper on Education. They deserve more widespread public debate.
There is a real problem in terms of additional demands, such as health and relationships and civic education, on an already overcrowded curriculum. There are various ways to approach the problem; the White Paper tentatively suggested exposing students to a very wide range of subjects in their first year, for example, narrowing it down somewhat afterwards. it also proposed a two tier approach with both long and short courses available in the different subjects. It may indeed be that history should be compulsory for all students for at least part of second level schooling; but that decision needs to be made in the context of a discussion of the full educational programme which we as a society wish to provide for our children.