den Aire Oideachais an dtabharfaidh sé cead do mhúinteoirí ins na meadhon-scoileanna an Ghaedhilg a mhúineadh do réir an chláir atá leagtha amach i gcóir na Gearmáinise, na Frainncise, na hIodáilise agus na Spáinnise in ionad an chláir atá ceaptha i gcóir na Gaedhilge i rialacháin 1929-30.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral—Answers. - Irish Teaching in Secondary Schools.
D'fhiafruigh
The Department's Regulations for Secondary Schools do not prescribe definite courses of programmes in the subjects referred to; they contain, however, general directions regarding the programmes to be followed, and a school is expected to prepare and submit for approval detailed courses of study in accordance with these directions.
I am not quite clear what the Deputy means when he asks if I will give permission to teachers to teach Irish according to the programme suggested for German, French, Italian and Spanish. If the arrangement of the programme and the methods of teaching are referred to, I would point out that the Department's directions in these respects make very little difference between Irish and the other modern languages named, and there appears to be no reason why a school, if it prefers to do so, should not follow a programme in Irish based on the directions given for continental languages, provided this programme complies with the conditions as to standard and extent required for Irish, and makes sufficient provision for the acquisition of conversational fluency in the language.
If the Minister will consult the regulations regarding curricula, certificates, examinations, and scholarships for 1929-30, p. No. 3, and if he will look at pages 17 and 31, and compare them, he will understand what I referred to. I had something to do with the Commission which drafted the programme for secondary schools, and Irish was on a level with the other subjects. It is not in a critical spirit I put this question, but in the interests of Irish, and if the Minister looks at page 17 he will find what I am referring to——
The Deputy is not in fact putting a question.
I would ask the Minister if he knows that it is laid down on page 17 of the programme, that in the first course new words and idioms, and so on, are to be learned, imitating good examples of writing and composition, and in the next year you have a number of words to learn—salutations, the weather, parts of the body, health, disease, and so on—whereas if you turn to the other languages referred to, you have phonetic drill, dialogues, songs, stories by heart, learning poetry, the memorising of poetry and prose. There have been papers set in Irish in which there was not a single line of poetry required. Does the Minister consider that is good enough for a knowledge of Irish—the mere acquisition of lists of words which is what the programme tends towards? That is what I had in mind in putting the question.
No, I can assure the Deputy that the standard required in Irish is actually higher than the standard required in other languages, owing to the fact that we assume that when coming to a secondary school pupils will have some knowledge, with the result that I do not think our inspection staff will be satisfied with the same actual knowledge—I do not say that as to the amount of teaching given, but they would have the same actual knowledge in Irish as when other languages begin to be acquired for the first time.
I put the question as, from information I have received from many sources and from the papers, I do not think there is as much scholarship associated with the Irish papers and as good grammatical knowledge of the language as is required for other languages.
Well, I hold the opposite.