Sir, – I'm delighted to see Diarmaid Ferriter's support for the education elements of the Ireland 2016 programme ("Failure to reverse Junior Cycle history plan is inexcusable", Opinion & Analysis, April 4th).
However, Prof Ferriter is wide of the mark in his claims about history at junior cycle level. At the moment, history is compulsory in half of our schools – those that were historically viewed as “academic” schools. But it is optional in the other half – those that were supposed to be “vocational” schools. Despite this lack of compulsion, over 90 per cent of all students take history for the Junior Cert.
We know students are doing too many subjects – often as many as 15 examinable subjects.
That puts them under dreadful pressure, and we’re now capping at 10 the number of subjects that can be studied at Junior Cycle for exam purposes. English, Irish and maths and a new course in wellbeing will be the only compulsory subjects. If you agree with Diarmaid, we should also make history and geography compulsory. Others would argue that science and modern languages are so important that they should be compulsory.
Others would argue that art and music are essential for students at this age. Inevitably, we would end up having one compulsory set of subjects for all of our young people. That would give them no say in their own education, a factor that contributes to young students disengaging from school. That’s not in the best interests of our students.
There is a network of 43 schools that have been piloting elements of the new Junior Cycle, to allow us to iron out any issues that arise. Not one of those schools – not a single one – has suggested that they will be dropping history as a subject at junior cycle. – Yours, etc,
JAN O’SULLIVAN, TD
Minister for Education
and Skills,
Marlborough Street,
Dublin 1.