Second-level focus on points stifles creative thinking

Education system requires students to prioritise memory skills over developing an ability to think freely

THE STATE examinations of 2009 are likely to be remembered by the general public as the year the Leaving Cert English Paper 2 was leaked. Some students and parents reacted as if North Korea had just announced it was going to test its nuclear missiles by strikes on exam centres.

An absurd overreaction, or a telling commentary on the flaws of the Leaving Cert system itself? Students have become experts at a kind of gambling as to which topics are likely to come up on any exam. Teachers who predict with most accuracy achieve “legend” status. The panic about the Leaving Cert English ensued because students were terrified that “their” poet, or character or theme would not now come up. Is it not fascinating that the substitute English paper, prepared independently from the first, had so many of the predicted topics? If our education system is supposed to prepare students for life, it would imply that cutting corners and gambling are seen as valuable life skills.

Well, until very recent times it might have been seen as a perfect preparation for a career in banking, I suppose.

Why do teachers (and I’m a teacher) collude in such a system? There is a very simple reason. Most of the examination courses are too long, and many demand more in the way of memory skills than understanding. The only way to get through them is to plough on, relying too much on whiteboard and talk. Creative teaching methods fall by the wayside under the sheer pressure of getting the courses finished.

Even though coursework undertaken for assessment has been introduced in some subjects, there is still a massive emphasis on the exam. As a result, we have a “notes” culture, where students often will not even use textbooks, which are in themselves pre-digested, but demand everything be reduced down further in the form of notes.

There is a great deal of disagreement as to what constitutes an education. There are the relentlessly utilitarian types, who insist that education is purely about preparation for the labour market. They would probably bin Shakespeare and replace him with computer classes. Then there are the high-minded idealists, who believe people should learn for the sake of learning. They would keep Shakespeare and probably bin the computers.

It is now conventional wisdom that people need less knowledge, since they can always look facts up on the internet. However, I think that is to confuse information with knowledge. Grappling with a subject is required before you can have real knowledge. Skills of accessing, selecting, evaluating and recording information only come after extensive practice. Engaging with challenging texts and ideas strengthens the ability to think. In short, we need both Shakespeare and technology. At present, we are doing justice to neither.

The sad fact is that our education system is not successful according to either utilitarian or idealistic criteria. Instead, we have a system designed to gain the points needed for entry to third-level courses, even for the significant number of students who do not intend to pursue further education.

Tom Boland of the Higher Education Authority recently complained that spoonfeeding at second level has rendered students incapable of taking the initiative. Mind you, given that third level has never been at the cutting edge of educational methodology and many lecturers teach today the same way as they did in 1985, perhaps it is a case of the kettle calling the pot black.

It is also a bit rich to hear Minister for Education Batt O’Keeffe calling for reform of the Junior Cycle, with more emphasis on active and independent learning.

This is the same Minister who assures us that the cuts will make no difference, that best practice informs his decision to axe special education classes and that the size of a class has no impact on learning. It is extraordinary to extol all that is best about education, and at the same time allow cuts to go ahead that will have a disastrous impact in classrooms.

Frankly, as a second-level teacher, it is a depressing time to be involved in education. The recent cuts will hit the disadvantaged and the special needs learners hardest. Transition year has been one of the great innovations in Irish education, and epitomises active and independent learning. The grant for transition year per student has disappeared, which means that many schools will no longer be able to offer it.

While the Minister spouts about education reform, these measures will make second-level schools resemble “points factories” more. It will only be in September that the real impact of the cuts will begin to be seen, and parents are in for nasty shocks.

Reform of the Leaving Cert crawled along at a snail’s pace during the boom years, but now we are also supposed to have reform of the Junior Cert. Given that the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) acknowledges that “investment in people, in the learning environment, in aspects of schools as learning organisations is fundamental to establishing a momentum for change”, very little is likely to happen in the near future.

The NCCA has been working on reform of the senior cycle for years. It has listed five key skills as central to education. They are information processing, being personally effective, communicating, critical and creative thinking and working with others.

It might be interesting to rate the present Government on the key skills mentioned by the NCCA. Brian Cowen is universally acknowledged to be an intelligent and decent man, but where are his communication skills? Where is the ability of this Government to motivate people with a vision of the future that would make sense of sacrifices in the present? Where is the creative thinking, the working with others? Instead, it is doing a fine job of alienating people.

O’Keeffe also called for fewer subjects. The last time that was mooted, history was the subject to be given the chop, an irony the Minister might want to bear in mind. Given that real reform has been pushed to the bottom of priorities, this cheapskate Government might think about shorter courses. Shorter courses would at least offer pupils a greater chance to develop the kind of skills our current Government seem to lack so sorely.