Joined-up Thinking     Joined-up Thinking Links   Back to homeducationetwork.org

'Irish schools follow a curriculum imbued with dogma. Thus, the prevailing ethos of most schools in Ireland is one of "obedience" rather than "thinking for one's self". Because of the strong emphasis on compliance with doctrine, on belief, there is little encouragement of the development of a student's critical, analytical and deductive faculties - cognitive processes that might result in the acquisition of mental tools that could be used to question the validity of that belief.'

Debra James investigates the influence of the churches on education in Ireland

Background

When I moved to Ireland in 1996, I didn't know that the schools were all (with a very small number - less than 1% - of exceptions) owned and controlled by the churches, not the State. I suppose, after years of legal battles to get my dyslexic son transported to the nearest school with adequate English-language remedial teaching, I really should have found out more about the education system I would encounter before I moved over here from Wales; but I had my son's educational psychologist's report ready for them this time...

I ended up leaving my job to home-educate my son after his painful experience of Irish National School education. The "Education Welfare Act 2000", which will require the registration of all home-educated children, and their examination as to whether the education they are receiving is adequate, is scheduled for implementation in July. I personally will not be sending my son to an Irish school, whether they 'approve' of his education or not, because the curriculum is fundamentally flawed: children are not taught to think.

A short history of public education in Ireland is given in The multi-denominational experience, by Professor Áine Hyland :

"When the National School system was set up in 1831, its main object was to 'unite in one system children of different creeds'. The National Board was 'to look with peculiar favour' on applicants for aid for schools jointly managed by Roman Catholics and Protestants.

"While many of the schools which were taken into connection with the Board in the early years were jointly managed, the main Christian churches put pressure on the government to allow aid to be given to schools under the management of individual churches. This pressure was so effective that, by the mid-nineteenth century, only 4% of national schools were under mixed management. ...

"In Ireland provision was never made for a separate system of primary schools controlled by the local authority, largely because it had been found by the Powis Commission in 1870 that voluntary effort had adequately met the demand for elementary education in this country.

"As a result, by the mid-twentieth century, the system of national education in the Republic of Ireland was one which was de jure undenominational, but de facto denominational in 97 per cent of cases. When the Irish Free State was set up in 1921, no major changes were made in the administrative system of national education. Radical curricular reform was introduced in 1922, based on the recommendations of the First National Programme Conference. In 1925, the government set up a committee under the chairmanship of Rev J McKenna SJ, to review the curriculum, and the report of this committee (known as the Second National Programme Conference), which was published in 1926, included the following statement.

'Of all the parts of the school curriculum Religious Instruction is by far the most important, as its subject matter, God's honour and service, includes the proper use of all man's faculties, and affords the most powerful inducements to their proper use. We assume therefore, that Religious Instruction is a fundamental part of the school course. Though the time allotted to it as a specific subject is necessarily short, a religious spirit should inform and vivify the whole work of the school. The teacher - while careful in the presence of children of different religious belief, not to touch on matters of controversy - should constantly inculcate, in connection with secular subjects the practice of charity, justice, truth, purity, patience, temperance, obedience to lawful authority and all the other moral virtues. In this way, he will fulfill the primary duty of an educator, the moulding to perfect form of his pupils' character, habituating them to observe in their relations with God and with their neighbour, the laws which God both directly through the dictates of natural reason and through Revelation, and indirectly through the ordinance of lawful authority, imposes on mankind.'

... "Taken together, the Rules of 1965 and the provisions of the 1971 curriculum created a new situation. The State now formally recognised the denominational character of the national school system and made no provision for, nor even adverted to the rights of those children whose parents did not wish them to attend exclusively denominational schools.

"It had removed the requirement for teachers to be sensitive to the religious beliefs of 'those of different religious persuasions'. According to the curriculum guidelines, all schools were expected to offer an integrated curriculum where religious and secular instruction would be integrated. While the rule under which parents were allowed to opt their children out of religious instruction still remained, the rule became effectively inoperable since religious and secular instruction would now be integrated.

"Even if religious instruction were separately timetabled, it could be assumed that a specifically denominational ethos would 'permeate the school day'."

A new "Religious Education" core curriculum that compares the beliefs of different faiths is being developed by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment; but there is, predictably, no hint of the introduction of a structured methodology for the teaching of thinking.

A call for the teaching of philosophy at second-level was made in the Irish Times recently by Micheál Tierney:

"One of the great tasks of philosophy is that of ethics, where moral arguments are rigorously examined using the tools of human reason and reflection on experience. "It, therefore, remains a source of considerable mystery as to why philosophy remains completely absent from the senior curriculum of our second-level schools.

"In one of his St Patrick's Day broadcasts in 1935, Eamon de Valera remarked that "Ireland remained a Catholic nation, and as such set the eternal destiny of man high above the 'isms' and idols of the day. Her people would accept no system that decried or imperilled that destiny."

"Good news then that a sub-committee of the Royal Irish Academy has recently submitted a proposal on the introduction of social and political philosophy as an optional Leaving Certificate exam subject to the NCCA, the statutory body which advises the Minister for Education on curriculum policy."

Dr Michael Telford, Principal of John Scottus School in Dublin, replied in a letter to the Editor:

"Reason and reflection, far from distancing religion from philosophy, only bring them closer together. The same point was also made in the "Faith and Reason" encyclical by the Pope a couple of years ago. Let us start again to embrace philosophy, put Plato back beside the Bible, and find out how enjoyable it is to apply reason and reflection to the hugely important issues of the day. The children in this school certainly have found that philosophy adds a new dimension to their lives."

The "sanitised", "Faith and Reason" encyclical-sanctioned thoughts of approved Philosophers vs. Others content that would be offered as a 'Philosophy' course in Irish schools can easily be imagined. Plato links smoothly to Descartes and Kant. But where are the existentialists?

Irish schools now follow a curriculum imbued with dogma. The prevailing ethos of most schools in Ireland is one of "obedience" rather than "thinking for one's self". Because of the strong emphasis on compliance with doctrine, on belief, there is little encouragement of the development of a student's critical, analytical and deductive faculties - cognitive processes that might result in the acquisition of mental tools that could be used to question the validity of that belief. Unfortunately, the lack of these tools is taking its toll on the Irish people. "Joined-up Thinking" is a plea for teaching readin', writin', 'rithmetic, and reasoning.

 

The study of philosophy: joined-up thinking

John Dewey, in his book, How We Think, wrote: "As long as our activity glides smoothly along from one thing to another, or as long as we permit our imagination to entertain fancies at pleasure, there is no call for reflection." (p. 11)

Most people flow along as smoothly as they can from one comfortable habit to another. We strive to be continually either preoccupied by work or distracted by entertainment. When either activity is interrupted by stillness and quiet, we hate it. "I'm bored," we say. If the progression from one habit to another is not smooth, we say: "I'm stressed out." Our ideal world is one in which there is no need for us to think. We are all skimming along on the surface of life, pretending everything is just fine.

"Not surprisingly, this smooth flowing hassle free lifestyle is a hot commodity. Who wants reflection if it means we have to think about the effect we have on others in our daily lives? As a result, we are largely unconscious of our actions." - Kristina Kenegos Sullivan.

We do lots of things "without thinking". For example, throwing litter out of car windows.

When there is stillness and quiet, reflection and contemplation can allow associations of ideas and experiences to develop in the mind. These associations may lead to the formation of new concepts; and these concepts can can lead on to new conclusions - conclusions that might not agree with preconceptions already entrenched in the mind. This conflict is uncomfortable, therefore undesirable.

So, contemplation when not at work is avoided by entertainment: we listen to the radio on the way home from work; then we watch the same hundred possible plots unfold on TV again and again; conflict, action, suspense, resolution of conflict. Then we go to bed, too tired to think.

It is undeniable that thinking is hard. Learning to think can't be done in an hour; or a day, or a week. It requires structured, disciplined effort over years to develop skills that include the ability to discriminate between what is objective and what is subjective; the ability to associate ideas in ways that can reveal new relationships between them; the ability to spot faulty logic and apply critical, deductive reasoning to the interpretation of information. Development of memory skills is another essential element of "joined-up thinking".

The criminal irresponsibility and vicious, nihilistic behaviour of so many Irish youth - especially when unsupervised, as on buses - is in large part the result of the inner conflict between what they are told in church and in school and what they learn to be true from their own experience of the world and the scientifically-verifiable information that they are now able to access. They have not been prepared mentally to analyse, to discriminate, and then to integrate their conclusions into their lives. They seek continuous distraction, entertainment, excitement. So they won't feel empty or angry. Or have to reflect on things too much.

"Let us start again to embrace philosophy, put Plato back beside the Bible, and find out how enjoyable it is to apply reason and reflection to the hugely important issues of the day", wrote Michael Telford, the Principal of John Scottus School (Irish Times Letters to the Editor, May 9).

In one of his St Patrick's Day broadcasts in 1935, Eamon de Valera remarked that "Ireland remained a Catholic nation, and as such set the eternal destiny of man high above the 'isms' and idols of the day. Her people would accept no system that decried or imperilled that destiny".

Plato was a "dualist", as were the "approved" philosophers Descartes and Kant. There are, of course, many other philosophers whose ideas are acceptable to the Catholic church. They came up with concepts like the "doctrine of double effect". (This doctrine rationalises allowing "immoral" acts to happen because they will ultimately have a "good" effect.)

If we mean by "teaching philosophy" that we will teach the thoughts of philosophers, in particular those approved by the Church, limiting the content of the course to what is included as acceptable in the "Faith and Reason" Papal encyclical, that is one thing. If we mean "to teach how to philosophise" (to think clearly, rationally, critically; i.e., analytically), that is something entirely different.

Teaching enough "philosophy" to help people hold conflicting ideas in their heads at the same time, to rationalise this conflict, might prevent some of the 'inexplicable' suicides of young men.

But the mentality necessary to "reason", the cognitive process that leads to deductive reasoning and analytical discrimination, is only created by years of development. It is not at all the same thing as teaching students that this idea is part of such-and-such an unacceptable "ism", that idea is part of such-and-such a false "ology" - like de Valera warned us about.

In the United States, young Catholics feel it is all right to disagree with the Church on issues of faith. They are determined to make up their own minds, even when their ideas are at odds with church teachings. Why is this? According to two studies by University of Michigan sociologist Duane Alwin, Catholic parents in the United States are placing less and less emphasis on obedience and more emphasis on thinking for one's self.

One study examined responses that Catholic and Protestant parents in Detroit, Michigan, gave to the following question: "If you had to choose, which thing on this list would you pick as the most important for a child to learn to prepare him for life?" The possible responses were: "to obey, to be well-liked or popular, to think for himself, to work hard, and to help others when they need help." Alwin examined the answers Catholic and Protestant parents gave to this question in 1958, 1971 and 1983. The results indicated a convergence of Catholic and Protestant parents on this issue. Protestant parents put more emphasis on thinking for one's self than on obedience in all three years. In 1958, Catholic parents put more emphasis on obedience than on independent thought. Between 1958 and 1983, however, there was a steady decline in Catholics parents' emphasis on obedience and a corresponding increase in their emphasis on thinking for one's self.

Alwin also found that parents' education was the most important influence on their child rearing values. Highly educated parents emphasised thinking for one's self; less educated parents emphasised obedience. Alwin concluded that this trend is the result of "the gradual assimilation of Catholic ethnic groups into American society."

The other study involved seven national samples of American Catholic and Protestant parents between 1973 and 1984, when Alwin examined responses to the following question: "The qualities listed on this card may all be important, but which three would you say are the most desirable for a child to have?" He grouped three responses ("responsible," "good sense and sound judgment," and "interested in how and why things happen") into a category he called "autonomy." He grouped three other responses ("obey," "good manners," and "neat and clean") into a category he called "conformity." Alwin found: "In every year surveyed since 1973, Catholics and white Protestants are virtually indistinguishable," with both denominations putting more emphasis on autonomy than on conformity.

Frequency of parents' religious participation was found to be a stronger influence on their answers than was their religious affiliation: religiously active parents gave higher priority to conformity; less active parents gave higher priority to autonomy. Both these studies point to convergence in the child rearing values of American Catholic and Protestant parents.

The failure of Irish society as a whole to value thoughtfulness and the ability to exercise critical thinking and deductive reasoning has resulted in the production of a generation of young people who have learned, instead, to value economic status, looks, and "getting away with it".

Much of Irish secondary education is taken up with requiring students to restate the obvious: to re-phrase conclusions someone else has already drawn. "Study guides" tell them what they should write on the exam paper when asked on the exam "what was the author trying to say about..." Off-the-shelf, pre-digested insights tell them what the examiners want to hear. The whole point of education, to most young Irish people, is passing the exams. If they do that, they can make enough money to stay comfortably thought-free.