Throughout the State, many parents and young people are coming to terms with the enormous problem of high dropout rates at third-level institutes of learning. Universities and institutes of technology are confronting a sheer drop in the numbers of students who make it into second year, compared to first-year enrolments.
Why do so many fail after clearing the enormous hurdle of the Leaving Certificate? Retention is a complex multi-faceted issue, but the dynamite of the Leaving Cert itself may be contributing to the problem. The Leaving Cert is a points rat-race, where support cramming can lead to large rewards visa-vis CAO points. The superficial learning does not serve students well when they come to third-level. For many students, independent learning is part of the alien culture that third level can be.
Do secondary students choose particular Leaving Cert subjects because they like them or because they think they are more likely to get higher points? It the latter is the case, then we are failing to educate. The Latin verb e-ducare means to lead out. The assumption the Romans made was that the educator was reawakening in the student the desire to learn that already existed. How can the desire to learn be truly awakened if the student takes subjects that he/she fundamentally has no interest in?
As a society funding a system of education, what do we make of students' subject choices? What is the purpose of the Leaving Cert? Is solely to enable students to get into college? Should it not allow our future citizens and work colleagues to develop on many levels: on a psychological and ethical level, as a citizen of a democratic country, and as an inhabitant of an ever-shrinking world facing both technological change and global environmental issues? Is it not time for us to look at whether the Leaving Cert subjects that students do actually prepare them for an ever more complex world?
We can attempt to ascertain how each subject contributes to a set of core values, knowledge base and set of skills - ranging from the arts and business to ethics and morality. Some subjects are versatile (e.g. English); some are specialist (e.g. chemistry).
Deciding how any subject is split between the core attributes should not be controversial. However, deciding which core attributes to shortlist is a matter for debate. Also, these core attributes have to be weighted. This is a politically fraught act. Before this can be done society needs to debate where we are going. Are we to educate our young people for specific business/technological skills, should we concentrate on developing the artistic ability of students, or should we try to ensure our students get a good preparation, not just for the workplace, but also for their future participative role in our democracy?
So what, you may ask: don't students decide which subjects to do at Leaving Certificate? This is true, but it also appears to be the case that students seem to pick subjects based on their perceptions of some subjects being easier than others to gain CAO points in. The result is that many students entering third-level with high CAO points have done subjects that do not adequately prepare them for their new educational challenge.
We seem to be educating a generation of scientific and historical illiterates: each year the numbers taking science and history continue to drop at a faster rate than the numbers doing the Leaving Cert. How can we be surprised that we are not doing well at: (a) developing indigenous industries instead of relying on hi-tech multinationals, (b) young people taking an interest in politics and current affairs?
Literacy is not just about spelling words, devoid of a context. It is also about being empowered to understand and contribute to the great issues facing us: managing technological change, preventing personal isolation and rootlessness, encouraging enthusiasm for democratic institutions, tackling environmental issues, to name a but few. We should have the courage and foresight to decide what we want second-level syllabuses to emphasise. All subjects are not equal. Subjects that encourage our young people to know themselves as spiritual and emotional beings living in a democratic country in a changing world should have a higher CAO points rating than specialist subjects that offer a more limited horizon to the student.
The table shows Leaving Cert subjects weighted in terms of prioritising the core attributes. Three core attributes were given maximum weighting: civic society and current affairs, communication skills and numeracy skills.
A high-versatile subject which is focused on the high-weighted core attributes scores highly, for example history. By contrast, a low-versatile subject that concentrates on lower-weighted core attributes scores more poorly - for example, accountancy. (The suggested weightings of core attributes and the compartmentalisation of the subjects are my own opinions and betray my own prejudices and ignorance of some subjects. Others will no doubt see things differently.)
The essential issue is this: what values do we want our young people to get from second-level education? Once this is debated and a consensus arrived at, we then weight the core attributes accordingly. This will result in some Leaving Cert subjects being worth more than others. Result: given the annual scramble for points, students will opt for the higher-weighted subjects. By-product: students learn a bit more about themselves, citizenship, and global change than they might have had they gone for "easy" subjects.
It should not be beyond the ken of the Department of Education to set up a task force to define and weight core attributes for Leaving Certificate subjects, in consultation with public opinion. (Arguably, such a task force should exclude teachers and lecturers, as we all feel strongly about our own subjects!) As the needs of society evolve, re-weighting can occur regularly, building flexibility into second-level education.
The values we (fail to) inculcate in our second-level students may have a wider impact than on just the dropout rate. Is the high rate of teenage alcohol abuse in Ireland related to students' sense of powerlessness and frustration at the Leaving Cert ritual?
While this proposal to weigh Leaving Certificate subjects is certainly not a complete panacea for high dropout rates, reorientation of student perspective towards an appreciation of their place in society might just lead to a greater maturity among students with consequent lowering of dropout rates at third-level.
Dr Philip McGuinness is a lecturer in computing at Dundalk Institute of Technology and a member of that institute's learning support unit.
Philip.McGuinness@dkit.ie
