Diarmaid Ferriter: Failure to reverse Junior Cert history plan is inexcusable

On Tuesday night, those leaving the launch at the National Museum in Collins Barracks of the Government’s official 1916 centenary programme were handed a substantial 64-page booklet outlining the programme. There is plenty in it that is welcome. Last year there were many justifiable concerns about an absence of concrete detail and leadership in relation to the commemoration, and the programme will allay some of those concerns.

To his credit, John Concannon, appointed to co-ordinate the programme, has had an energetic few months, meeting interested parties and trying to strike a balance between the different strands of commemorative endeavour.

It is also clear the framework for commemoration has been broadened to confront some of the blind spots of previous commemorations, with a focus on multiple layers of experiences, the role of gender and the civilian experience, accompanied by an unambiguous assertion, previously elided, that “there was hardly a family in Ireland in 1916 that was not affected by the first World War”. The programme also underlines the importance of military ceremony in 2016; after all, the Rising was first and foremost a military event.

1916 leaders

The commitment to key capital projects, or what the programme refers to as “The Permanent Reminders”, including the GPO interpretative centre, restoration of parts of Richmond Barracks where the 1916 leaders were court-martialled, a tenement museum in Henrietta Street, refurbishment of Kilmainham prison and new, purpose-built military archives, is particularly welcome. These will long outlive the centenary and provide an opportunity for further enhancement of knowledge, analysis and context. Specific engagement with local authorities and their wonderful libraries is also to be commended, as local commemorations need to be valued and supported.

There is also a fair amount of waffle, woolliness and vagueness in the programme. What is a “large-scale signature people’s event”? The assertion that “2016 will belong to everyone on this island” is a bit far-fetched; in a way, that declaration reaches back to the section of the 1916 Proclamation that stated the Republic declared then was “oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past”.

Would that it were so simple, then or now. As historian Joe Lee has observed, the Proclamation was “hopelessly out of touch with reality in its view of Ulster unionist resistance to home rule, which Pearse romanticised just as he did so much else in Irish history . . . The rebels might be ‘oblivious of the differences’, unionists were not”. Nor are they today, and we won’t see many of them on O’Connell Street in 2016.

There is a worthy focus in the programme on education and “encouraging historical inquiry at local community, school and academic level”, accompanied by online learning resources. While a cynical eye might be cast on the plan to ask schoolchildren to write a new proclamation for their generation – after all, one already exists and they might legitimately ask that more be done to give it practical meaning instead of concentrating on fashioning a new one – there is at least a commitment to prioritise engagement at all levels of the education system. However, I must admit the phrase “Education for Sustainable Development” leaves me cold, and I am not convinced “reimagining our future” really means anything.

Revolutionary period

In relation to education, there is a stated aim to “generate additional interest and enthusiasm for the revolutionary period of the history curriculum” and a new Leaving Cert subject to be piloted in a number of schools, entitled “politics and society”, “to ensure that 2016 promotes a legacy of interest in politics and active citizenship”.

Here we encounter, ironically, the great elephant in the programme room and a glaring omission. There was an opportunity here to reverse the plan to drop history as a core, compulsory subject for the Junior Cert. Changes to the Junior Cert programme proposed by a national curriculum assessment unit were unveiled and endorsed in October 2012, and described as radical and seismic under the banner title Towards a Framework For the Junior Cycle. History and geography are no longer to be compulsory subjects; instead, history is alluded to under a statement of learning, to the effect that a student would value "local, national and international heritage, understand the importance of the relationship between past and current events and the forces that drive change", by means of an optional "short course" or "learning experience", which could also be fulfilled by a range of other subjects, including Chinese or religious education.

History, it is clear from these proposals, is not going to be taught under this curriculum in a systematic, thorough or meaningful way and can be ignored if that is the choice of the school.

Not tackling this deep irony, at a time when the Government’s programme is trumpeting the importance of commemoration and memory and the intrinsic contribution of a historical knowledge to citizenship, is inexcusable.