The Leaving Cert is a popular spectator sport in Ireland. “Le Bac” in France generates the same level of obsession, although the examination systems are very different. For example, a four-hour philosophy exam is a compulsory part of the Baccalaureate. Can’t see that happening here any time soon.
People have strong opinions about the Leaving Cert because it has been a rite of passage for generations. These opinions range from those who see no need for change because it allegedly never did them any harm, to those who see the exam as a form of abuse of adolescents.
Unsurprisingly, the proposed Leaving Cert reform for those entering fifth year in 2023, with the students sitting paper one in both English and Irish at the end of the first year instead of the second, has generated fierce controversy.
It has been declared disadvantageous to boys, who mature more slowly than girls. People have also suggested that it will simply double the pressure of the Leaving Cert.
A modular Leaving Cert could be an excellent thing – but this is not a proper modular Leaving Cert. As Conradh na Gaeilge discovered in documents released under Freedom of Information legislation, this was sought as a quick win for the Department of Education.
[ Irish Times Leaving Cert results 2022 helpdeskOpens in new window ]
[ Leaving Cert: No ‘cliff edge’ drop in grades next year, says FoleyOpens in new window ]
In an internal email, Harold Hislop, the chief inspector and a highly influential figure in the Department of Education, characterised sitting paper one in Irish, English and maths as “early wins”. (The proposal to include maths was later dropped.)
The State Examination Commission (SEC) has serious reservations. Similarly, teachers feel that the skills used in both paper one and paper two are intertwined and that sitting just one paper after a year will lead to much poorer results overall.
Charitable interpretation
The charitable interpretation of all of this is that both the Minister and the department are aware of the severe mental stress that the Leaving Cert generates and wanted to do something quick, easy and effective.
The less charitable – or perhaps more accurate interpretation – is that this is a half-baked idea, designed to be seen to be doing something, and with the potential to damage meaningful reform.
The real pity will be if the backlash against the proposed change destroys the possibility of a far better modular Leaving Cert.
Even in the Baccalaureate, universally recognised to be gruelling, students sit one big exam at the end of their first year. Until Michael Gove, then the British minister for education, looked into his heart around 2013 and decided he knew what was best for the A-levels, they too were modular. AS-levels were taken at various stages of the first year and A2 levels during the following year. AS-levels still exist in England but don’t count toward final results.
Wales and Northern Ireland continued with modular A-levels, yet the exams in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are accepted as equivalent to each other. Similarly, international A-levels are still modular and are very popular.
Modules that are examined at different stages over the two years are not the problem. The way that this alleged “quick win” has been foisted on schools without proper thought and planning is the problem.
Furthermore, the point about boys being disadvantaged by their relative lack of maturity can be viewed in a different way. Boys have had a venerable tradition of doing very little in the fifth year and then cramming for the sixth year.
Exam technique
An exam at the end of fifth year could help many boys (and some girls) to focus. Similarly, part of the art of passing exams is becoming good at exam technique. A meaningful exam at the end of the fifth year could develop these skills of expression, analysis and synthesis.
A spokesperson for the Department of Education, in response to the concerns raised recently, uttered the words all educators have come to dread.
“There will be communications and engagement with students and with schools, including teachers, in advance of the introduction of this change.”
The change is announced via the media and then there is a consultation of those most involved. This is a grimly predictable and demeaning pattern.
Imagine if, instead, extensive consultations had taken place about what a modular Leaving Cert could look like, one where the modules built in a meaningful fashion on the preceding ones.
Instead, we have just chopped the existing Leaving Cert in half in these subjects and now attempts are going to be made to dress it up as something else.
There are aspects of the current Leaving Cert English exam that could be changed and not a tear would be shed. The comparative question, where students compare often wildly different novels, films and plays using what amounts to a series of headings is widely considered to be contrived to the point of farce.
And can we please, please be careful about further planned reform that will rely heavily on coursework? Other jurisdictions have moved away from coursework simply because abuse was so prevalent.
There is still time to create a modular Leaving Cert that will reduce stress rather than increase it. However, a botched reform is worse than no reform.