Michael Conaghan (Dublin South Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am glad of this opportunity to comment on the proposed innovation in the junior cycle curriculum. Reform of the junior cycle will provide for new learning experiences, encounters and formats. The proposed innovations will give teachers flexibility and space to do these things. When teachers can be more creative and experimental, students will benefit from that sort of activity which is built into the proposed reforms.

Adopting these new approaches will allow teachers to shed some of the more traditional practices that have become rather hackneyed, tired and unproductive, such as over reliance on memorising facts. Being occupied with what will come up in the examination is also a part of the constraints on learning that are so typical of the older traditional systems of practice.

The proposed changes will serve young people better as they prepare for a future where they will continue to be learners, citizens, employees and employers. As the Minister has suggested, the proposed innovation will better prepare young people for adult life.

Overall, the proposed reforms are positive and welcome. Nonetheless, I have some slight criticisms of them. For example, the cover of the booklet shows pictures of young people doing science, home economics, biology field-work and physical education. However, there is no picture of a young person engaging in the arts, playing a musical instrument, dancing or doing drama or mime. Up to one third of the primary school curriculum comprises dance, drama, mime, music and visual arts, but the provision of that element of the curriculum is haphazard. In that context, I thought the Minister would have considered creative, interesting and engaging ways of addressing those deficits in the primary school curriculum. There is an opportunity to insert the arts into the junior school curriculum. The arts are the strongest medium for self discovery and creativity, which is a requirement for all those growing up in the modern world.

Another criticism is the lack of thinking about learning environments. Teachers should be encouraged and facilitated to break out of the classroom into other learning environments, including the outdoors. I cite an example from Inchicore and Kilmainham with which I am most familiar. Large numbers of third level students come to the area lying between the rivers Liffey and Camac, because between the confluence of both rivers one instantly understands how topography and physical landscape shapes the pattern of human settlement. In the classroom, however, students learn it from a book. The contrast is so striking between old and new modes of learning. The Minister should have been far more daring in encouraging teachers to break out of the classroom and look at the interesting, productive potential of the outdoors, whether for studying botany or other subjects. Teachers are not precluded from doing that, but there should be overt statements outlining the value of these new learning environments that would concur so well with the suggestions for new ways of learning.

New modes of learning require new modes of assessment and certification. I urge the introduction of what is referred to as cross-moderation. Over the last 20 years, there are many good examples where City of Dublin VEC and the Department of Education and Skills, in conjunction with Trinity College, have introduced a range of new modes of assessment for course work and different learning categories similar to what the Minister is proposing. That method should allow tried and tested forms of assessment. It would guarantee objectivity and remove bias and favouritism. Some teachers see the latter issues as barriers to implementing these changes.

Having made those criticisms, I am encouraged by what the Minister is doing. We are in Donogh O'Malley territory with this Minister. I urge him to pay some attention to what we are saying, as I know he will. I encourage him in his endeavours.

See this speech in context