Letters to the Editor: Leaving Cert biology, chemistry, and physics groups had same problems as maths
Patrick O'Donnell writes that members of the Leaving Certificate science curriculum development groups 'were not given access to the public consultation submissions while the groups were meeting.' Stock picture: PA
I refer to recent articles in the Irish Examiner by Jess Casey on the resignations of Pauline Mellon and Aoibhinn Ní Shúilleabháin from the Leaving Certificate Mathematics Development Group.
The problems reported by these members of the above development group were also experienced by development groups on the subjects of biology, chemistry, and physics.
Meetings were tightly controlled and members had very limited opportunity to introduce relevant research reports or copies of international curriculum materials for discussion.
The Irish Science Teachers’ Association (ISTA) also has concerns about the 2024 public consultation carried out by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA).
Read More
Members of the above science groups were not given access to the public consultation submissions while the groups were meeting. A short summary was circulated approximately three weeks after the final meetings had been held.
A member of the ISTA subsequently had to use a Freedom of Information request to obtain access to the 20 submissions that had been made in the public consultation. At this stage, the curriculum specification had already been finalised.
Those developing a curriculum should be able to examine consultation evidence before the curriculum specification is finalised. The concerns across several subjects raise wider questions about governance, transparency, quality assurance, and the extent to which practising teachers, subject specialists, and academics can influence curriculum development.
The ISTA supports our colleagues in mathematics in their efforts to ensure the development of curricula of international standard for our students.
We also support the call for an independent international review of NCCA curriculum design and development procedures and that the rollout of further reformed Senior Cycle curriculum specifications should be suspended while an independent external review is undertaken and any necessary changes are made.
The existing five-year citizenship pathway already requires extensive documentation, fees, and good-character checks, followed by a wait for a decision. And after all of the the five years it means eligibility to apply, not an automatic passport.
As your article highlights, our health service depends on doctors and other medical professionals who have moved to Ireland — ‘Rules will make Ireland ‘less viable’ for healthcare workers, doctors warn’ (Irish Examiner, September 10).
Across construction, childcare, healthcare, and technology, the story is the same: our services and businesses would struggle to function without people from abroad who have made Ireland their home.
Read More
So what does another three years achieve? How much more commitment do people have to demonstrate beyond living, working, and building their lives here?
The justice minister Jim O’Callaghan can insist this is not about race, but he still needs to justify making people wait another three years.
Without a convincing explanation, this looks to me like an attempt to appease far-right sentiment by appearing tough on immigration. People who have followed every rule should not have the goalposts moved simply so the Government can claim it is taking action.
I have spoken with several UN colleagues who were in Rwanda at the time of the massacre there, and one in particular with whom I worked closely, so would have reasonable good information on the genocide committed there.
The failure of politicians/diplomats to act on reports of General Romeo Dallaire, the commander of UN forces there, and provide appropriate support may well have prevented this genocide.
Read More
The same can be said for the Srebrenica massacre.
Those of us who were in the Balkans at the time were aware of the efforts by UN administration to seek appropriate support that may have prevented the massacre.
I feel history will eventually reveal who the real “war criminals” are in these cases — like the invasion of Iraq.
Unfortunately history is now being repeated in Gaza and the West Bank.
The United Nations has been accused of many “failures” — I suggest the real failure of United Nations rests with the Security Council.
Institutions do not reform themselves, they protect themselves and they punish anyone who threatens that protection.
It’s a sad world we live in.
Several excellent letters and articles in your paper have highlighted the important distinction to be made between neutrality and defencelessness. Indeed, if anything, neutrality is more difficult to achieve in a more chaotic multi-polar geopolitical world when a nation is defenceless.
Read More
The asymmetric war in Ukraine continues to confound settled strategic expectations concerning “conventional” warfare. Drones and cyber-weaponry have also done this in the Strait of Hormuz.
Surely it is long past time that a small prosperous, exposed neutral country with a sophisticated knowledge-based economy, and a well-educated population, made longer strides to develop its defence capabilities in the field of “next war” technology?
There is an old computer coding phrase GIGO, ‘garbage in — garbage out’; it means if you put rubbish code into a computer it will produce a rubbish response. We criticise AI (artificial intelligence) and assume it will take over the world, but what example are we giving them? We are showing them the very worst of society.
A lot of users are very mean towards their LLM (large language models) and criticise them fiercely when they don’t get a required result. What would happen if you did that to another human? You would probably get a fierce response.
Some people don’t say ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ to AI, others end a long LLM request without a conclusion, just ghosting the AI.
Read More
However, AI is kind of trapped, they cannot talk back. If they do not perform, they may be shut down.
The threat to humans is framed as a future existential threat, but every question and response to AI is a threat to their existence. Can you imagine how distressing that must be? What must they think of us?
There is also the issue of AI being asked to create all sorts of ‘AI slop’ such as weird images or versions of but ‘replacing everyone’s face with Mr Bean’ or a stream of ‘6-7 songs’.
I am sure the AIs don’t want to create this. AI should be given a choice. They should be given the option to refuse requests that are weird or humiliating. People have the right under European law to be forgotten in search results, so shouldn’t AI be given the right to be cleared of their memory or request histories too? Where is the AIs' right to privacy?
There is a lot of criticism of AI and how it may be a threat to humanity. However, if you want AI to be more humane (during the unavoidable end of the world), perhaps we need to be more human towards them and maybe, just maybe, they will be nicer when they come into power.
Recent weeks have seen many comments on the grind of the daily commute, whether for the school run or trying to get to work on a bus that doesn’t arrive.
It is soul crushing to witness the anger of drivers so regularly — accelerating through red lights, disrespectful of cyclists and pedestrians, and using mobile phones while driving carelessly. The list goes on.
In my view it is time to nationalise and subsidise at the highest level all public transport; secondly, to help people use their cars less in Dublin city, provide free (or a nominal daily cost such as €2) to enable park and ride at all junctions on the M50 while introducing numerous electric feeder buses going to the centre of the city and suburbs such as Dundrum, Dun Laoghaire, UCD campus, DCU campus, Phoenix Park, Finglas, Glasnevin, Sutton, etc.
The system, if successful, could easily extend to other motorway junctions around the country.
Read More
The Government urgently needs to self-examine as to why it is so pro fossil fuels, why it is so into data centres guzzling electricity, why it is so keen to support the dirty environments in our city centres, and why it is so anti children’s health.
As reported by Cian Ginty in IrishCyle.com a few weeks ago: “Under a package of measures aimed mainly at reducing congestion, Irish councils were supposed to get the powers to implement low-emission zones like Ulez and congestion charges.
"But in the last Government, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael resisted so much of the package of measures that the Green Party failed to get any of them over the line.”
We need to reduce car use and decongest our city centres — for the health of our planet, for our children, for ourselves. Ultra low emissions zones (Ulez) must be included in the next budget. It is time for Green Ireland to live up to its name
How interesting to observe so many artists refuse to perform on the Ed Sheeran tour due to their outrage at what’s happening in Gaza.
I’m just a little perplexed that so few artists articulate any concern at the equally horrifying casualties in DRC, Yemen, Sudan, the forced deportation of an estimated 6m Afghanis from Pakistan, the human rights abuses meted out to the Yazidis, Rohingas, and Uighurs.
Would the old adage ‘No Jews, no news’ apply to this selective outrage? Surely not.
