If you're going to cut the Junior Cert, do it for the right reasons

Profile by Tadhg Carey Updated: Wednesday, 4th November, 2009 5:00pm

In the craziness that is post-bank guarantee Ireland, it seems that rogue financial institutions are the only things immune to the snip-happy meanderings of Irish politicians.

Everywhere you turn; on every radio station you listen to, or every newspaper you read, they're talking cuts. Cut wages; cut public spending; cut social welfare, or investment in schools.

The latest "cut" floating in the ether is proposed axing of the Junior Certificate examinations, with Cabinet members allegedly discussing the move, which could save the Exchequer €30 million per annum.

Reports say that the end-of-year exams would be replaced by continuous assessment, but the move has already been described as "counter-productive" by the ASTI.

Of course, such a move - if considered for the right reasons - has its merits. The Irish examination system has its detractors, most notably DCU President, Ferdinand von Prondzynski, who made a couple of interesting points in a recent interview with our sister paper, the Westmeath Examiner.

Perhaps, taking a lead from Prof. von Prondzynski's point of view, if this were a genuine attempt to reform the education system and the examinations process, then Cabinet ministers might be more inclined to look at the merits not of the Junior Cert, but of the Leaving Certificate as it stands.

In the September interview, the Professor stated that the Leaving Cert points system is "damaging the country", and he called on the Government to tear down "barriers" which have been put up to Leaving Cert reform.

He maintains that students who obtain high points are "pushed" into certain professions such as law and medicine, and bemoans the fact that vital reforms of the Leaving Cert curriculum have not taken place.

One wonders if long-term thinking about our education system ever entered the picture during these Cabinet discussions.

Or is the proposed demise of the Junior Cert just another knee-jerk "cost-cutting exercise"?

Speaking on Sunday, it's clear that ASTI general secretary John White seems to think so, and it's hard to disagree with him.

In an Ireland where the new policy is to cut first and ask questions later, it's quite possible that a question as crucial as education reform would become a policy plaything for Government hatchet men.

Getting rid of the Junior Cert is a serious proposition.

It has ramifications not only for teachers and civil servants working in the Department of Education and Science, but also generations of school students who will go through secondary level schooling.

As the "Junior" is a key step in preparing for the Leaving Cert, removing it from the picture also has long-term implications for how the senior exam operates.

If accompanied by serious discussion, the abolition of the "Junior" also has the potential to force the issue of real education reform. For instance, might we see vital questions about the school curriculum being asked and answered? Might it be explained why secondary school children emerge with very little grasp of languages, or indeed their native tongue? Must we insist on churning out maths, science and business geniuses, while ignoring the importance of history, or the absence of philosophy from teaching programmes?

So much can be done now to save money in education, while at the same time planning for the future, to ensure we do not repeat our mistakes.

We are told that such planning is underway, with the Government examining the "viability" of a system of continuous assessment to replace the Junior Cert exam.

But why does one get the feeling that this is a mere sop, or a means to an end; that end being the arbitrary axing of the Junior Cert for the purposes of saving euros, euros which have so infamously doled out in their billions, to bail out "you-know-who".