Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I second the amendment to the motion outlined by my colleague, Senator Jim D'Arcy, who said that the position of history as a subject is secure and that history will continue to be studied by the vast majority of students at junior certificate level. The Minister outlined in his speech the number of students who are taking the subject and will continue to take the subject. Change is never easy and the new junior certificate has come about following consultation since April 2010. There were online consultations and a number of meetings were held around the country with the National Parents Council. During that period of consultation, the need for a core group of subjects was identified and individuals and groups were asked for their opinions. I looked at information from the IVEA, the Joint Managerial Board, JMB, and the Teachers Union of Ireland which submitted their thoughts. None of those three bodies mentioned history, but mentioned English, Irish, mathematics, science, physical education, CSPE and RSE. Subjects along those lines seemed to be the common theme. I agree that history is an important subject.

There is clear evidence of the need for change in the junior cycle. I can see that students do not make much progress in English and maths in their first years, and hence the reason for introducing the assessment earlier. This will give feedback to parents and they will see where the student stands rather than leaving it for three years when the student sits an exam in June and gets the results in September when the student is facing into the senior cycle, having never got to grips with maths, English, history or science. That is what we have debated and we are now in the process of introducing a new cycle at the junior level.

As I said change is never easy. I read an article in yesterday's newspaper in which a science teacher who had supervised 200 students during the two-hour State junior certificate science examination reported that ordinary level students left the examination after 35 minutes, and those taking the higher level paper left after 90 minutes. Students found the exam too easy and one student said that the examination in his or her favourite subject was too easy and did not give the person an opportunity to prove himself or herself. She commented that students were not expected to be able to draw a diagram of the circulatory system as it is already printed on the exam paper. The teacher questioned whether we are encouraging the students to learn in a different way and whether they will have a great understanding of the subject.

As I said change is challenging, but the process to establish the new junior cycle has been worked through with a great deal of work on assessment and consultation. I think it is welcome for the benefits that have been outlined in this debate.

We have debated the designation of core subjects - maths, English and Irish. I do not think that Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell is proposing in her motion to make history a compulsory subject, but she wants it to be a core subject. "Compulsion" is a word that may have negative connotations. The Minister stated there will be three core subjects and a range of subjects within which schools can chose to offer. I would have liked to have science as a core subject. I know there were many calls for that, but the Minister made the case previously on that issue.

History is a very important subject. The fact that it is the fifth most popular subject that students take supports its strong standing. Like all learning it depends on the teacher who teaches it. The next question is the content of the course. I hope we will have confidence in the proposed changes in our system of education and to know these changes are based on consultation, sound facts and that they will encourage and develop a love of learning and the subject, whatever subject choice takes the students interest.