In this article from 1997, Sr Teresa McCormack identifies defects in the Irish school-leaving public exams and argues that the system is in serious need of reform.
It is important to acknowledge, at the outset, that the Leaving Certificate programme and examination have a number of strengths. First, for example, the programme has earned a reputation at home and abroad for high academic standards. Second, the examination process is seen by most people as objective – at least in the sense that it treats all candidates in the same way.
Questionable assumptions
However, the Leaving Certificate is based on some very questionable assumptions about the educational needs of young people. In particular, it places almost exclusive emphasis on the rigorous study of subjects in the sciences and the humanities, and neglects a variety of other aspects of human development. From the perspective of a Christian understanding of social justice, this situation is completely unacceptable.
Christianity asserts the dignity of each and every individual and requires that everyone has an equal right to grow towards wholeness. As such, a Christian philosophy of education must regard all aspects of the human personality (intellectual, aesthetic, physical, spiritual, etc.) as equally valid. This philosophy must also reject a system which
places a premium on any particular type of educational attainment as the basis for distributing prestige or status within society.
The injustice created by the present system is greatly worsened by the fact that the performance in the Leaving Certificate is closely related to socio-economic background and that young people who live in poverty are less likely than others to obtain valuable educational qualifications.
In this article, I will try to illustrate how this imbalance in the programme places young people from poor families at a particular disadvantage. I will go on to argue, however, that the Leaving Certificate has damaging effects on all students, and conclude that it is in need of radical reform.
Irrelevant exam
Every year there are up to 4,000 young people for whom the Leaving Certificate is completely irrelevant. These young people, almost all of whom are poor, leave school before even taking the Junior Certificate examination. They leave without any formal qualification or certification and with a sense of failure, loss of self esteem, and alienation. A further 10,000, approximately, leave school after the Junior Certificate but before taking the Leaving Certificate. In addition, about 7,000 young people do so badly in the Leaving Certificate examination that the certificate which they receive is of little value to them when it comes to looking for a job. In all, more than 20,000 students (approximately 25°/b) a year derive little benefit from the Leaving Certificate programme. While a number of factors contribute to this situation, such as the quality of teacher/student relationships, it is largely due to the fact that the Leaving Certificate curriculum and examination undervalue many of the talents of students who come from poor backgrounds.
Those who drop out before the Leaving Certificate level and those who do badly in the examination are at grave risk of experiencing long-term unemployment. Because these young people come largely from families living in poverty, the Leaving Certificate can be said to be playing a significant part in perpetuating poverty and social inequality. Indeed, the Conference of Religious of Ireland (CORI) has been one of a number of voices which has pointed to the growing significance of educational qualifications in determining life chances, and argued that breaking the link between poor educational attainment and poverty needed to be made a major policy priority.
Narrow focus
The damaging effects of the Leaving Certificate are not confined to disadvantaged students. All students suffer from the narrow academic focus of the existing programme and from the excessive emphasis on preparation to compete in public examinations. This extremely narrow academic focus of the curriculum means that many human abilities and qualities are not developed or even recognised. These qualities, which all young people need to develop for work and for life, include self expression, initiative, the ability to work co-operatively, and a sense of social solidarity. Also, the system’s failure to develop forms of assessment which recognise and certify a wide range of human abilities and qualities, such as those mentioned above, reinforces the excessively narrow focus of the curriculum.
In addition, the Leaving Certificate examination (the main purpose of which is supposed to be the certification of completion of post primary schooling) has been hijacked by the needs of third level institutions. It currently suits these institutions to have an exam system which facilitates the ordering of students on the basis of “once-off” written examinations. Thus, we have the annual points race, and the unhealthy individualism and competition which accompany it.
Overall, we seem to have arrived at a point where the Leaving Certificate is almost totally irrelevant for a significant minority of students and is relevant to only parts of the lives of all students.
New programmes
As a response to these problems, particularly those being encountered by students for whom the programme is clearly unsuitable, the Department of Education now offers students at Senior Cycle three types of programme – the Leaving Certificate traditional, the Leaving Certificate Applied Programme (LCAP) and the Leaving Certificate Vocational Programme (LCVP). Of the 65,881 students who sat the Leaving Certificate this year, 1,056 took the LCAP and 2,755 the LCVP. Both of these alternative programmes are more practically/vocationally oriented and focus on preparing young people for work and further education. They emphasise the development of characteristics such as enterprise, initiative and the ability to work in teams, and they use a variety of forms of assessment. However, the take up of these programmes remains low. This may be due to a perception on the part of students and their parents that participation in alternative programmes is an admission of an inability to cope with the high prestige Leaving Certificate. One also suspects that there is a reluctance on the part of some schools to offer alternatives because they fear that to do so might damage their reputation as “academic institutions.” In addition, certificates from alternative programmes have, so far at least, failed to attract the prestige necessary (among employers, for example) for those who have them to compete effectively in the labour market. In this regard, however, it is important to recognise the efforts of the NCCA, through the chairman of its LCAP subcommittee, Senator Fergal Quinn to convince employers of the relevance of the alternative programmes. The fact that the Garda Siochanna have announced that they will accept the LCAP is also significant.
Ironically, the alternative programmes seem to have the potential to counteract some of the weaknesses at Senior Cycle by broadening the educational experiences of young people and promoting new forms of assessment. However, in order for this potential to be realised, CORI believes that it will be necessary to
(a) minimise the extent to which the new programmes are seen as having lower status than the traditional Leaving Certificate. This could be done by ensuring that all of the Senior Cycle options are available to all students and by promoting participation in the so-called “alternative programmes,” through a variety of measures including positive discrimination in terms, for example, of funding and certification;
(b) continue to challenge employers to examine their almost exclusive use of the traditional Leaving Certificate as a selection instrument for jobs. In many situations there is a gap between the education young people are getting in the traditional Leaving Certificate and the competencies they need to be effective contributors in society and work.
Unified programme
Ultimately, however, CORI believes that the real value of the new programmes is not just that they provide alternative educational experiences for some students but that they point the way towards changes which should be made in the educational experiences of all students. In the long term, therefore, it would be desirable to move towards a unified Senior Cycle programme
• which would offer several broad areas of study (academic, vocational, personal and social development, etc.) from which students would be required to choose broadly (Le. they should not confine themselves simply to vocational or academic units) and
• where assessment and certification would treat each of these areas and the abilities and qualities they promote as equal in value. This would bring about a better match between, on the one hand, the needs of young people and the wider society, including the labour market, and, on the other hand, what the education system can offer. It would also overcome the inevitable tendency for alternative programmes to be perceived as of inferior status and to have less currency in the labour market. As such, it would have a significant impact on breaking the link between poor educational attainment and poverty.
Holistic education
From a Christian perspective, it is clear that the Leaving Certificate is seriously deficient. The critical test of any policy or system is whether it enhances or threatens human dignity. As one of the most significant features of the education system, the Leaving Certificate contributes to denying young people the opportunity to pursue a holistic education. It also consigns many of these young people to a sense of failure, loss of self-esteem, and to being at a disadvantage in the labour market, therefore, excluding them from full participation in society. Reflection on the following quotation from Vatican II must continue to challenge us to radically reform the Leaving Certificate:
“The future of humanity lies in the hands of those who are strong enough to provide coming generations with reasons for living and hoping” (Gaudium et Spes, no. 31).
This article first appeared in Reality (September 1997), a Redemptorist publication.
