Mr. Humphrey Jones:

Mr. Convey talked about comparing ourselves internationally first and foremost. If we look at our junior cycle science curriculum, the specification document is 27 pages long, and five pages cover all of the learning outcomes. In fact, the JCT published a document which has all 47 learning outcomes on one page. When we compare that to the GCSE science syllabus produced by the Oxford, Cambridge and RSA, OCR, it is 164 pages long. The vast majority of that is going through each learning outcome, outlining the depth of treatment that is required and the experiments that need to be carried out in order to achieve the goals of the learning outcome. It links into things like literacy in mathematics and other core skills as well.

Our curriculum does not stand up internationally. That is the reality. When we look at our senior cycle specifications and what has been developed in computer science and in agricultural science and we look at courses within the international baccalaureate, IB, or A level, again, the material does not stack up internationally. The quality of the teaching in a classroom will never exceed the quality of the curriculum that is laid out. That is the bottom line. If we are starting with a really poor curriculum then we will end up with a poor product at the very end of it. We will not see the result of the poor junior cycle science specification until ten or 15 years down the line, so it does need to be addressed rather quickly. The content knowledge that is required by our junior cycle science pupils is incredibly low. We have moved from a course where I can see the sentiment behind it, which was developed with the idea of developing key skills such as communication, critical thinking and so on as well, but it has gone too far. Those who developed the curriculum did not quite understand that we can develop all the core skills and values we want but at the same time stretch our pupils cognitively by getting them to engage in meaningful counter-knowledge. That is where we need to address our balance. I am worried about the long-term effects of our junior cycle science curriculum on our competitiveness internationally and as we start moving towards a review of biology, chemistry and physics at leaving certificate, which are going to use the same flawed model. In the longer term, that gets even more worrying.