Why Junior Cert History Ought to be Compulsory

The Folly of Making History Optional

Minister for Education, Ruairi Quinn, recently challenged historians to show the country why their subject mattered. He proposes to make history an optional subject at Junior Cert level.

As a young historian and as a secondary school teacher, I would like to briefly respond to Mr, Quinn’s challenge. I am firmly against this move, as are all history teachers in Ireland. I believe that the removal of history as a compulsory subject can only have a detrimental effect on the study of history in general. History is important on one level as a practical subject: it teaches one how to research, how to evaluate sources and viewpoints and how to argue. More importantly it teaches us who we are and where we have come from - it links us with the past and brings a sense of order and continuity to our existence. 

Mr. Quinn tells us that making history is simply a logistical decision - one part of a long overdue revamp of the junior cycle. Questioning the position of history however is far more than simply to do with timetabling and finances. Rather it has to do with power, underpinning political belief and ultimately an attempt to create a different Ireland. 

We all know how important our history is to our identity. As a small and relatively new nation, Ireland is still establishing itself as a young democracy and at this time of change and upheaval in Europe, it is important to realize that our strength lies in maintaining our Irish uniqueness and individuality. In order to fully understand why we are unique, it is crucial that we as a nation, and as individual citizens, have an adequate knowledge of our history. The old proverb says, You don’t know where you’re going unless you know where you've been’ - if we want to remain respected as a credible state among the nations of the world, which as a clear idea of how it wishes to develop in the future, the we must have a firm grasp on where we have come from and how we have got to where we are.

In England, history is optional at GCSE level. Statistics show that in 2011 only 30% of students in state schools studied the subject. The result has been a shocking fall in the quality of historical knowledge among British teenagers, with a recent survey revealing that many did not know which countries had taken part in World War II. Historian Eric Hobsbawn wrote that when history is not taught, young people ‘grow up in a permanent present, lacking any organic relation to the public past of the times they live in’. This results in a disinterest in sustaining community, and little awareness of one’s own responsibility as a public citizen. Healthy interest in politics and public development will fall and the domination of certain, inadequate world views becomes probable. Debate dies away because national knowledge is no longer deemed important.

Mr.Quinn’s proposals are therefore worrying. When one downgrades history and other ‘knowledge’ subjects, and places heavy emphasis on practical aspects of the curriculum such as literacy and numeracy, there is a real danger that upcoming generations will lack ‘higher order’ skills such as analysis, critical thought and creativity. They will be able to perform simple maths; they will be able to write; they will be able to read; they will be able to follow instructions; but if they have not been allowed to experience and become acquainted with the lives of those who came before them, the development of society, the power of propaganda, the signs and effects of dictatorship and tyranny, the causes of war, the changes in religion, the Reformation movement, the potential of revolutions and rebellions, the acquisition of power, the importance of knowledge, they will have no precedent to refer to, no sense of societal continuity, and indeed no knowledge of the mistakes and successes of the past to aid them in their evaluation of the present. Life can then become very simple. Society can become very orderly. A population with no troublesome criticisms based on historical knowledge can become a useful ‘human resource’. People can content themselves with a regular wage, food on the table and access to leisure pursuits. Without a knowledge of the past, there is little impetus to change, criticize, suggest better ways, demand a better life or to engage in critical thought. 

Finally, Mr. Quinn encourages us, as history teachers, to lure students rather than coerce them. While this is an admirable sentiment, and indeed it would be hugely desirable that students choose to study history of their own accord, it must be pointed out that it is 12 and 13 year olds in question here. It is out of character for this age group to want to study most subjects that are important, including Maths and English. Let us be careful of treating children like 3rd level students. It is our duty as teachers to choose the subjects for our pupils that will enable them to develop into fully-formed , capable, well-educated citizens who are an asset to the country. Many national leaders were one-time students of history and it must be remembered that Winston Churchill declared that it was through the study of history that ‘statecraft’ would be learned.

The study of history is vitally important for the future of Ireland. The recent decision by Mr. Quinn to make it simply optional is to be regretted. The parents and teachers of this country owe it to our nation to demand that history be maintained as a compulsory subject in our schools, and to ensure that our talented children be given the opportunity to know who they are and where they have come from. 

AislingNB
https://twitter.com/AislingNb

Learning not to Run

He is always running. Always trying to be ahead. Never content as others are with the daily cycle of life, the comforting security of common structures. 

Even at birth he struggles. He fights his brother to be first, and when he doesn’t succeed then, he schemes and plans to win authority some other way. Defying tradition, he craftily acquires his brother’s inheritance and becomes possessor of the birthright. He is ever trying to prove himself, and is the victim of his mind’s continual deliberations.

It is on his flight from home, escaping the murderous intentions of his angry, mistreated brother, that he first comes face to face with the God of his father Isaac and his grandfather Abraham. With bare desert stone for a pillow beneath his head, his restless sleep is interrupted by the vision of a ladder and at the top One who speaks the words ‘…I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father and the God of Isaac; the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it and to thy seed…’ To the exiled son, the words are purest music to his ears. Is not this just what he desires most strongly? Power and glory?

And so, he continues to run, hectic and busy, along the road of his life. Yes, God has promised - he himself will make God’s promise true in his own life. And so, he slaves for his uncle, an equally sly individual, and cunningly gains wealth. He falls in love with his employer’s daughter, but ends up with his fiancée’s sister. Not willing to be thwarted from his true desires, his strength of character carries him through seven more long years of work and waiting. 

The years pass and soon it is time to move on. It seems as though the touch of God, obtained at the encounter at Bethel, has quickly worn away. Everyday routine and the continual mental calculations and devising all have their effect on a spiritual life. He leaves his uncle suddenly and silently - unawares - and travels out into the darkness. He leaves like a thief in the night when he was appointed the heir of the world. He is seeing the fulfillment of God’s promise - on his own terms. He is surrounded by blessing yet inside his soul is shadowed, still untouched by the hand of God. 

The procession reaches a river and there as they halt, news comes that the aggrieved brother is approaching, still looking for revenge. Once again they move on under the cover of the ever-present night. For this man, the darkness has become a most important part of his life. 

All the family, the flocks and the herds, pass over the river and the man remains behind. As the dust once again settle and the ripples wash themselves out of the murky water, he is forced to stand still. For the first time in his life, the running has stopped. He comes face to face, again, with the One who met him so many years before on a similar night. This time though, its not just words that are spoken. Not just promises proclaimed by a distant Figure looking down from heaven.  This time there is no ladder, no space between the Holy One and the schemer. This time, there is no hindrance. God presses on to the great end He has in view for this man - this worm. It is a scene no human eye can watch: the crisis of a man clasped in the very arms of God.

Morning breaks. Dawn rises on this long night. If you watch closely, you will see a man walk into the sunrise. He looks familiar, yet at the same time he looks entirely different. He is moving slowly. He is limping. 

Across a face etched with deep pain is an expression of deep and lasting peace. 

I watch and nearby I hear someone ask ‘ Is that Jacob, the ambitious deceiver?’

The answer comes, solemn, clear, ‘No, that is Israel: for as a prince, he has power with God and with men, and has prevailed’.

The years slip by and after a full, eventful life,  the time comes for this man to bless his grandsons. ‘God, which fed me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads’. 

And the man, who fought so long to fulfill God’s promise by himself, who was known as the deceiver, who made enemies of those closest to him, who knew so well what it was like to run in his own strength, now worships God - his Father -  ‘leaning upon the top of his staff’.

A Tale of Two Neighbours

I parked outside their home only a few weeks ago. As I idly waited for my passenger, I looked at the low-roofed building wedged in between the bigger business premised round about. Lace drapes hung in the little windows and in one, I could see a glass vase holding some pretty flowers. ‘That’s a home,’ I remember thinking, ‘Someone who lives here cares enough to make the place look special’. Then the door slowly opened and a small man stepped out, dressed simply in a navy jumper and dark trousers. A hunchback with a gentle face. He stood on the pavement and silently surveyed the street, up and down, and then he simply soaked in the sunshine of the beautiful summers day. Here was Tom Blaine, king of his quiet sphere.

Just a few yards around the corner from this peaceful humble place is the office of Enda Kenny. It too is small and unpretentious, but the whole town, indeed the whole country, know who Mr. Kenny is. Castlebar is very much the Taosieach’s town and many here are proud of the ‘power’ the Mayo man, ‘one of ourselves,’ has attained.  He is rarely there, as the pressing responsibility of ruling the country and developing the nation as a successful, ‘safe’ place in which to live, demands much of his attention.

But so much has changed since that quiet afternoon on New Antrim Street. Never again will Tom walk through that little door and gaze peacefully around at his world. Never again will the traffic kindly come to a halt and let him make his crossing as he takes a stroll around the town. For Tom and his brother Jack were cruelly murdered in their home on Tuesday night.

They were needy.  They were harmless, vulnerable, human. Their deaths have reverberated around the community bringing a devastating sense of loss; they have also forced us to take a cold hard look at the state of our society. They should not have died. Their deaths have no reason.

But it cannot be simply coincidence that as they were battered to death in a town which ought to have insured that nothing like that would ever happen, their neighbour was making a new law that in his country, vulnerable, helpless human beings could be killed – in certain cases. Mr. Kenny was resolutely facilitating the passing of a Bill by his government that would legalize abortion in Ireland – a bill destined to tragically end the lives of precious, vulnerable and helpless unborn children. The Bill this week has passed through the Dail ad looks set to become part of Irish law.

Forgive me, but I cannot help seeing seeing in one event the reflection of another.  What sort of a society have we that can produce young men like Alan Cawley? No, we cannot foist the guilt onto a minority group, or say that an Irish person would never do such a thing. One of our own is responsible for the deaths of two quiet men who could not protect themselves. And yet, what sort of a leader have we that can push through a piece of deathly legislation, against the wishes of thousands of citizens, and make Ireland an even more dangerous place for the vulnerable, the helpless, the most precious of our society?

Two neighbours; Tom Blaine, and his brother, needy and vulnerable, brutally murdered – Enda Kenny, powerful and ‘self-sufficient’, responsible now for innocent blood. Terrible things have happened in Castlebar this week. We will miss Tom and Jack Blaine...and how many more?

A Dangerous Piece of Legislation: Why I am voting NO on Nov 10th

 
1.    Irish law already adequately protects children.

a.    Children rights currently exist under Article 40: 'All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law.'

b.    Under the Lisbon Treaty, Ireland adheres to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This charter includes Article 24 – 'The Rights of the Child'.

i.    1. Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their wellbeing. They may express their views freely. Such views shall be taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity.

ii.    2. In all actions relating to children, whether taken by public authorities or private institutions, the child's best interests must be a primary consideration.

iii.    3. Every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests.

c.    The HSE has overall responsibility for the assessment and management of child protection concerns.

d.    An Garda Siochana has responsibility for the investigation of alleged offences, and also has power to intervene to protect children in emergencies and to remove a child to a place of safety.

2.    The problems presented to us as reasons to vote 'Yes' are the result of bad practice on behalf of State services. Solutions for these pressing problems already exist. 
3.    This amendment is really about removing power from parents and giving it to the State.

a.    The amendment states that in certain cases, 'the State as guardian of the common good shall, by proportionate means as provided by law, endeavour to supply the place of the parents'.

b.    This will give power to social workers to remove children immediately from their parents, on the basis of some 'subjective' future problem, where the 'safety or welfare of [a child] is likely to be prejudicially affected'.

c.    The indefinite nature of such wording leaves it open to a variety of interpretations.

4.    The State record is far from commendable and leaves much to be desired.

a.    Since 2000, 509 children have gone missing from State care. 451 are still unaccounted for.

b.    23 children in State care or known to the child protection services died from March 2010 – June 2011 (this excludes deaths from natural causes). Causes of death were 9 by suicide, 4 by drug overdoses, 2 by homicide, 5 in road traffic incidents and 3 in other accidents.

5.    Parents are better for children than the State.

Studies comparing children in non-parental care with children in parental care (e.g. living with their parents) show that children in parental care perform significantly better academically and socially and are less likely to be aggressive. Children in non-parental care have a greater risk of developing emotional and psychological problems and are more likely to go to prison than university.

 

What I decided to do on my First Day Off Work...

I haven't written here for ages! Let's remedy that.

I received the results of my MA thesis 'Defending the Land, Defending the Faith: Ian Paisley and the Rhetoric of Protestant Defence' last week - I was thrilled to pass with a First Class Honours. God has been so good to me. Last year was so busy and even though I spent the summer researching and writing, travelling to Belfast, examining archives in the Linenhall Library, PRONI and the James Hardimann Library, writing drafts and re-writing drafts in Mom's office which she very kindly lent to me, I was not at all sure that it would be successful. The topic is controversial and I was ever aware of the fine line between fact and bias. Even when I submitted it on the last Friday in August, it was with much trepidation.

Last Thursday I arrived home from work and found an A4 envelope awaiting me in the kitchen. It had a blankly ominous look and sure enough, the postmark confirmed that it was from NUIG. Without allowing myself to think, I raced down the hall away from the curious eyes of my little sister and ripped open the letter in the silence of an empty sitting-room. Feverishly my eyes sped to the final mark at the bottom of the page. I saw nothing else except the words 'First Class Honours'.  Moments later I was babbling incoherently down the phone 'I'm so happy, I'm so happy, I'm so happy', and wrapping my arms around bemused siblings, who reacted to my hugely uncharacteristic behavior with slight bewilderment. I am normally not prone to such outbursts! But yes, such a relief. I'm still on cloud nine. 

I was like this for a while. But now it's all DONE:)

Other important things:

• I'm teaching and loving it! As well as German and English, I'm taking on Basketball responsibilities, and helping with Athletics coaching. And I used to hate sport as a child.
• I'm campaigning for a NO vote in the upcoming Children's Referendum. I will be posting more info about that very soon.

To Stay or Not To Stay: Cardinal Brady and Clerical Abuse

Recently I was asked to speak on Radio Ocean FM concerning the recent Cardinal Brady scandal. Below is a brief synopsis of my 'developing' thoughts on the issue. 

Without a doubt, anyone who has watched the recent BBC program concerning Irish clerical abuse can only have deep sympathy for those who suffered such awful trauma. Specially harrowing is the fact that this abuse came from people, figures, individuals for whom they had the utmost respect and trust. There are several aspects to this situation that must not be ignored however, especially when it is considered in the context of current anti-religious developments in Ireland.

Cardinal Brady, the primate of Ireland, was and is simply a servant of the Roman Catholic Church. In that sphere, 30 years ago, he completed his duties, observed the law of the Church and acted submissive to his superiors as was expected of him. In accordance with the fact that he was dealing with a serious abuse case, he promptly and diligently followed the guidelines of canon law -  the dictates of the Catholic Church -  to the best of his ability. We have no reason to doubt this. The incriminating documents record the work of a conscientious man. In this respect he was dedicated to his Church – he chose not to tell the Guards, but such an action would be completely unexpected and out of order for him. He states himself that he acted as he thought 'most effectively to end the abuse' and he allocated 'the case to the clergyman most powerful to deal with it'. 

 What we ought not to do here is jump to a subjective conclusion and accuse Cardinal Brady of not acting correctly. Instead it is very important that we look at the Church as a body objectively – and observe that the problem lies with the institution of the Catholic Church. It is not established solely on Scriptural principles. Its law book is not the Christian Bible, but rather the dictates of tradition and the Church fathers. This is an institution which regards Brady, not as a free individual, at liberty to obey the dictates of his conscience, but rather as a servant, duty bound to the law of the Church, its traditions and rituals. The Church has become the conscience of its people; it has power that God never gave to it, and this power sadly to say has turned to terrible abuse, evident in the actions of individuals such as Brendan Smyth. 

Cardinal Brady did not have the freedom to exercise his own moral judgement, to be led by what his conscience may have been saying. Instead he followed the rules of his Church and considered such adherence enough. 

  Should Brady resign? I would not take it upon myself to exercise moral authority over him and demand him to go, as many politicians and media presenters are currently doing - he's a servant of the Church, he did what was required of him and it's his own business. He has done his duty as a Catholic priest. We need to move the focus away from him and instead look at the institution of the Church which allowed this all to happen. If we take issue with what happened, we need to leave the Catholic Church. It is not an institution which is about to radically change. 

 I come from a Catholic background myself, but left the Church, am now a Christian. I have the freedom to obey my conscience - a freedom which was claimed at the Reformation when the Reformers rebelled against a system that chained them to rules and traditions, and embraced the hallowed privilege of conscience. I am free to act as I believe God would want me to act, and to live my life as an individual, accountable to God – not captive to any religion but beholden only to Him. If I had been in Brady's situation, I would have followed my conscience, as an individual before God. My loyalty is to God. Brady's loyalty is the the Church of Rome. 

  High Moral Ground

 Having said all this however, I do think we need to be very careful of the current 'witchhunt' into the Catholic Church. There are people pointing the finger in a very righteous and indignant way today whose own reactions in a similar situation could be very dubious. With actions like these, one always needs to be objective and think for themselves – What is really going on here? 

 Miriam O'Callaghan, Prime Time Presenter, for example, can appear so empathetic and caring now when she interviews Brendan Bolan, the victim of clerical abuse; however the question must be asked, if a serious issue regarding some victim in a politically incorrect, unpopular situation was brought to her attention as an individual in a position of authority, what would she do about it? Would she whistleblow? 

 Where does she get the authority to pronounce a moral judgement upon Seán Brady and call upon him to leave his post? 

 Whilst I don't agree with the Catholic Church, I do wonder if Enda Kenny and Eamonn Gilmore are trying their best to remove any vestige of a spiritual belief in God from the Irish people – are they seeking to become our new gods? This current scandal is yet another blow at the Catholic Church, seeking to remove it from its position of spiritual guidance; our current government want to remove religion from schools, legalise same-sex marriages, provide abortion services, forbid us from exercising conscientious objection, force us to pay a tax on our own homes and command us to give up our national sovereignty to a faceless European institution that few people understand. We need to be very careful of falling for everything the Kenny/Gilmore duo say. Let us think things out for ourselves. Are the accusers of Cardinal Brady really concerned about child abuse when we look at the sad state of many families in our nation today, and consider the upsetting levels of abuse amongst children in state care or are they more concerned with promoting secularism, breaking down our standards, and replacing the God we have with a new god of their own making? Words like moral credibility and moral authority are bandied about in serious tones, but it is of extreme importance that we look beyond the faces of politicians and TV presenters and discern what really is the reason behind their words.

Why I Study History

The Relationship Between History and Policy

NUIG MA History Seminar Presentation, 27 March 2012 

 The appointment of a special board of eleven historians to help the government prepare appropriately for the upcoming Decade of Centenaries, including the Ulster Covenant and the Easter Rising, is evidence that the study of history is still of considerable importance in the running of a country. (Once I used to think that you would celebrate one of those and protest in whatever appropriate or inappropriate way at the other - and anyone who attempted to celebrate both was a hypocrite...but anyway.) 

Historians can assist in deconstructing conceptions of past occurrences which are open to different interpretations, they can examine current popular belief concerning topical issues and they can assess how 'our actions and thoughts are conditioned by the heritage of the past', and are thus not as valid, as rational, and as necessary as we believe they are. Quentin Smith says that 'the stories we tell about ourselves are always and unavoidable partial...it becomes the task of the historian to ensure that such stories are not uncritically accepted.' By doing this historians can, undoubtedly, make a valuable contribution to public policy: for example John Bew's work in examining the role of Ulster Presbyterians in the 1798 rebellion reminds one that the version of irrational, sectarian Unionism that exists in Northern Ireland today may not be the only interpretation of Unionism in existence, and thus encourages government to consider more deeply the original intentions of Unionism. My own study of Thomas Davis' version of a united Irish nation which firmly valued both Catholics and Protestants, and also of the Orange Order in Northern Ireland which became the final refuge of an increasingly alienated sector of Ulster society opened my understanding, and indeed developed my criticism, of policy development in Northern Ireland. 

 In such deconstruction however, caution must always be exercised as deconstruction must always be accompanied with some form of reconstruction. Stefan Berg's words, 'It seems wiser to assume that society would be better off with weak and playful identities rather than those underpinned by a strong sense of a common national past', are alarming; just as a human being needs a strong sense of self-identity to perform to his or her full potential, so too does a nation. Public policy formation should start with this identity; historians should not simply be given the task of justifying already-created unpalatable policies to make them appeal to the nation. Historians can take current situations and make analogical comparisons with similar occurrences in the past, thus educating those who formulate public policy. 

One needs to be aware of the danger of looking for direct parallels in the past and thus predicting the future; successful use of history to guide current policy development will take into account the otherness of the past, the uniqueness of the present, and will at the same time 'reclaim some of the richness of past experiences'. A good example of this is Christopher Andrews examination of the 'Holy Terror'; he outlines that while US intelligence believes that the current war on terrorism, sparked by 9/11, is dealing with an entirely new adversary and thence requires unprecedented methods4, Early Modern Europe was also a society plagued by Muslim fanaticism in the form, for example, of Barbary ghuzat who saw themselves as religious warriors. A historical examiniation of this phenomenon ought to increase awareness for those involved in fighting against it. Likewise the study of economic history can increase understanding of the current recession; a recent study I carried out on the development of Antwerp in the sixteenth century outlined how the entrepreneurship of immigrants into the area was encouraged by the traditional stress put on 'values such as achievement, competition, toleration, industry, thrift and calculation'; these values had created a pro-enterprise culture'. As today's policy-makers seek to encourage entrepreneurship in Ireland, a consideration of successful enterprise cultures would no doubt be useful. 

NUIG MA class 2011-2012

 Personally I believe that historians have a vital role to play in the formation of public policy; much depends upon their own historical beliefs however, and it would be hoped that in Ireland those who have remained loyal to the essence of Irish identity would be the ones who have the greatest impact on the policy formation.