Earlier I indicated I was giving permission to Senator Horgan to raise a matter on the Adjournment. The matter is on the alteration on the status of music as a subject in the leaving certificate examination. It is the custom for the mover to be allowed 20 minutes, leaving ten minutes for the Parliamentary Secretary to reply.
Adjournment Debate: Leaving Certificate Music Course.
I am glad to see the Parliamentary Secretary in the House although I had hoped to have been able to wish his immediate superior bon voyage. Firstly, I should like to talk briefly about the background to the problem I have raised. It is one which goes back to 1925 when the leaving certificate was established in its present form. Since then, music was available up to very recently in most ordinary and honours courses and was examined at the appropriate level. The number doing music has grown steadily over the years but what is perhaps even more important is the fact that a very high proportion of the students doing music at leaving certificate level have, traditionally, done it at honours. This shows to anybody who knows anything about education that people who do music are informed by a very high sense of specialisation and dedication to what is a very difficult as well as a very rewarding subject. Recent figures, for example, indicate that before the honours paper was terminated the percentage of students doing honours in music was as high as 67 or 68 per cent. When we compare that with the 11 per cent or so who did honours in maths and the 51 per cent who did honours in art, we will see this is evidence of a very high degree of dedication.
Since 1925 we have seen the very slow emergence of music, as it were. The Minister has a very lively interest in the subject and to the best of my recollection has spoken very warmly of it as an element in the transitional year experiment which he has piloted in a number of schools. One would have hoped that this upward trend would have continued and, indeed, until recently there were signs that this was, in fact, the case.
When we turn to the question of the more recent history of music as a subject in the leaving certificate, however, the position changes. In 1975, the last year in which music was available at both pass and honours level in the leaving certificate, approximately 950 students took music in the leaving certificate. This was a substantial achievement for the educational system as well as for the students and their teachers. Simultaneously with this a number of developments were taking place, some of them benign and some not so benign. The most obvious of these, initially at any rate, was the revamping of the syllabus for music which was referred to by the Minister for Education in answer to a Dáil Question on 20th October. He said at column 53 of Volume 293:
The position in regard to Music, as to all subjects of the curriculum for the intermediate and leaving certificate examinations, is that, with due notice changes are made following recommendations from syllabus committees representative of teachers' organisations, managerial associations and the relevant university faculties as well as representatives of the Department of Education. There was complete agreement when the new syllabus in music and musicianship was introduced in 1974, for examination for the first time at leaving certificate level in 1976 and dissatisfaction has not since been expressed with the syllabus as such.
This statement is, of course, very true. There has been no dissatisfaction with the syllabus. There has, however, been considerable dissatisfaction at things which have happened alongside the revamping of the syllabus and which have necessitated in turn other changes which have not been made. In line with the re-vamping of the syllabus my understanding is that the syllabus committee of the Department of Education decided to introduce a single paper for music in the leaving certificate. I used the phrase "single paper" advisedly because there is no evidence that the syllabus committee had in mind what is generally known within the Department of Education as a common paper. A common paper is the paper which is held with certain other subjects such as technical drawing and has, in fact, a relatively well-known existence in the Department of Education. I do not believe it was necessarily the case that the syllabus committee intended that their single music paper should become a common paper in strict terms. Unfortunately, perhaps through some administrative hiccup inside the Department, this is the box into which this particular paper was put.
The syllabus committee was then confronted with the situation in which the universities decided that they would regard this common paper of a lower level than the honours paper for particular purposes. This was severely affecting both the popularity of music as a subject and, indeed, its immediate prospects. The committee unanimously decided in April, 1976, to propose that the paper be divided again into its two former component parts. In other words, that there would continue to be an honours paper and that there would continue to be a pass paper. This has not yet been acted on by the Minister for Education. The results of it are already plain to see. In the 1976 leaving certificate music examination the numbers taking music had already fallen from 950 in the previous year to approximately 650. I suspect they would have fallen even further had there not been a widespread assumption on the part of music teachers that in fact the common paper would be abolished and the original set of honours and pass papers would be re-introduced.
Because of failure to take this decision to re-introduce the honours and pass papers in music, the present situation can only be described as parlous. I do not know what the present rate of enrolment for music in the leaving certificate is but I would be very surprised if it were anything as high as the 650 that sat for music last year. I would not be surprised if it were as low as 200. In reply to another parliamentary question later on, the Minister for Education gave details of the number of children studying music as part of their leaving certificate course. He was able to show to his satisfaction that the numbers of people actually doing music as part of their leaving certificate course was very substantial; it ran into 3,268 in 1973-74 and in 1975-76 it was up to 3,473, a very substantial figure. The acid test of whether or not music is acceptable and whether or not the examination and marking system is acceptable is not the number of people who are taking it as a course in school but the number who are going to sit for it in the leaving certificate examination. When we see those statistics I suspect we will see a very different picture indeed.
There are two problems here, one of them relatively minor. The minor one is whether or not the Minister has decided to extend, as I gather he may have been asked to extend, the date for signifying that one proposes to do music in the leaving certificate so as to allow this problem to be clarified before people actually commit themselves. If he did this it would be an indication of goodwill on his part— while it would not necessarily solve the whole problem. All that is involved at this stage is indicating that one wants to do music in the leaving certificate. It does not actually force one to do music when one gets there. I suspect that the number of people who actually sign on now to say they will do music and who actually do music will be substantially reduced if the two papers are not re-introduced.
There are two areas here. One is an area which the Minister has said is one of his concern and the other is more properly an area of his responsibility. The area in which he has concern is in relation to the attitude of the universities towards this common paper. The attitude of the universities towards this common paper has created the situation in which music is the only subject which is available at degree level which is not now available at honours level. Music has been downgraded for points in entry to University College, Dublin, and Trinity College, Dublin, and even in the other colleges of the National University of Ireland where it is treated more favourably from a points point of view there is the situation that it has been downgraded by the Senate of the National University of Ireland in terms of their matriculation requirements. I may have something to say in that area at another time and the Minister can be assured that in his attempts to get the universities to change on this issue he will have my full support. This does not necessarily solve the problem. The reclassification might solve the problem for music but not for other subjects. Still, there has to be some progress.
Specifically in the area of the Minister's own responsibility there is the question of his decision with regard to the unanimous recommendation of the syllabus committee. This committee has urged a re-introduction of the pass and honours system in music. Educationalists, parents and teachers alike are all clamouring for this. It would be not only unnecessary to deny them but it would contribute very substantially to a very serious decline in standard and practice of music here. I should like to know whether the Minister has made a final decision on this. If he has decided finally to over-rule the recommendation of this syllabus committee, why has he decided to do so, and even in such a case is he prepared, even at this relatively late stage, to review this decision in the interests not only of the students who are confused and uncertain about the future, but in the interests of a whole generation of players of music, of concert-goers and indeed of performers of music in this country for the foreseeable future?
I should like to say a few words on the very interesting subject that has been raised here by Senator Horgan and, indeed, that has been debated so ably by him and presented in such a very eloquent fashion. Most of us would concede that music is a tremendously important factor in the education of the individual. At the same time, many of us will concede that we are not all born with the same abilities as far as music is concerned. To complete the education of the individual, if at all possible, we as an Oireachtas should aim at having in our educational system a scheme whereby people would get the opportunity of educating themselves. It is a tremendous accomplishment for any individual to be fairly well versed in music. After all, the Irish people have a very high tradition and a very high musical standard. They have not got any great symphonies or high-class music, probably, to their credit, but it is true to say that the resurgence of Comhaltas Ceoltóirí Éireann over the last 20 years and the research that has been done into traditional Irish music is valued very highly by the average Irish person. I feel that people such as Comhaltas Ceoltóirí Éireann have rescued from oblivion many fine Irish tunes and many fine pieces of Irish music.
The Senator is going very wide. On an adjournment debate speeches must be on the net issue raised.
On the issue raised I just want to make a point on the attitude of the universities so far as music as a subject for entry into the universities is concerned. I feel, and I think the average person in this country feels, that the universities and the governing bodies seem to have far too much power in allotting points for various subjects particularly in regard to music. It is regrettable that music has been downgraded in this fashion. I cannot place all the blame on the Department of Education; the universities certainly have a part to play in it. It is typical of the attitude that many of our universities have adopted for quite a number of years to various subjects that are taught all over Ireland. They have the sole privilege of deciding what points are to be awarded to various subjects and in that way they can rule the career of potential students because they will not be able to gain admission.
I am glad to have this opportunity of affording some clarification to the House in relation to the matter which has been raised by Senator Horgan. Following discussions and deliberations which took place over a period of two years, the music syllabus committee in 1974 made certain recommendations to the Minister in regard to the examination of the subject of music at leaving certificate level. As Senators will no doubt be aware, the music syllabus committee is representative of the teachers' organisations, the school managerial bodies and the relevant university faculties as well as the Department. The recommendations which the committee made were (a) to replace the then three existing subjects, music, general and practical musicianship and general musicianship by a single subject called music and musicianship; (b) to have this single subject examined at one level only instead of at ordinary and higher level as had been the case with the three subjects it was intended to replace. It was their opinion that the course of action recommended by them would consolidate the status of music at leaving certificate level and would provide a programme of study suited to the aptitudes and requirements of all our young people.
The committee also considered that, with suitably framed questions, one written paper and one oral paper would be sufficient to give the more brilliant student abundant scope for showing himself to best advantage, while at the same time amply accommodating the student of average ability. The Department accepted the recommendations of the syllabus committee and all concerned in the exercise had high hopes of their success. The revised syllabus was examined at leaving certificate level for the first time in 1976. I think it is clear from what I have said that neither the syllabus committee nor the Department entertained any intention of diminishing the status of this most important subject. In fact, the opposite was the case.
Let me refer back very briefly to a point made by Senator Horgan, when he suggested that it was not the committee's intention that the subject would be examined at common level. It is true to say that they did not say, in so many words, that they specifically requested a common paper but there are and were at the time the committee made the recommendation—and the committee were undoubtedly aware of this—only three ways of examining papers for the leaving certificate, namely, ordinary level, higher level and common level. Therefore, by eliminating the first two as they proposed to do, ipso facto they were recommending a common paper and this would seem to be the case from re-reading the text of the recommendations which I have already put on the record of the House.
However, due to practical problems which appeared likely to arise in connection with the implementation of the new structure of the examination enshrined in the syllabus committee's recommendations, it was decided to reconvene the committee in April, 1976 at their own request. After re-appraisal of the situation the committee recommended a reversion to the ordinary and higher level mode of examination for 1977 in the subject. The Minister was unable to agree to this recommendation as it is incumbent on him to give two years' notice to the schools of any alteration or variation in the syllabus for leaving certificate examinations. I think the House will appreciate why such notice is necessary.
One of the difficulties in relation to the 1976 leaving certificate examination relates to its examination at common level. While this level is in the opinion of the syllabus committee and also of the Department of Education, the equivalent of higher level, it would appear that this particular circumstance posed problems for the university authorities. Approaches have been made to the National University and the matter is now being considered by the individual colleges. The Minister takes the view and is confident that the Seanad will agree with him that it is highly desirable that students presenting this subject at the 1977 examination should be in a position to enjoy the equivalent of higher level recognition for it. The situation as it stands is unsatisfactory and a cause of deep disappointment to students who have embarked, in good faith and with high hopes, on their leaving certificate course in the subject and a cause of no little bewilderment to teachers who, after all their efforts, now fear that the practical effect of the universities' difficulties will be to discourage student participation in this most fundamental cultural subject.
The Minister has deep sympathy for all those students and teachers alike who are caught up in this situation which, as is also in the case of the Minister, is not a situation of their own making. However, he is hopeful that the discussions which are now taking place will produce a result favourable to the best interests of the students and teachers of music and musicianship generally. He is doing all in his power to resolve the problem.
Generally it would appear that the course in music and musicianship first examined in 1976 was of a standard best suited to the abler student, despite its authors' admirable intentions. Perhaps, as has been remarked by an eminent authority in the field, we were trying to go too far, too fast. Standards must, however, be maintained but at the same time we must seek to cater also for the broad spectrum of students at leaving certificate level. Ironically, it may be that the common level paper, as it is so described, far from being too easy, may have worked out to be too difficult for some of the less able students rather than the reverse which seems to be the opinion being adopted now by some of the university authorities. The Minister would hope, however, that as a result of the talks to which I have referred, the matter will be resolved in the reasonably near future. He would also hope to be able to make a statement in due course, giving further information in the matter.
Might I ask the Parliamentary Secretary by way of postscript whether he would agree that only three months' notice was given of the change from the joint paper to the common level paper? In the light of this, even if he cannot do anything about the examination this year, will he give an undertaking, if the response from the universities is not satisfactory, to restore definitively the two papers in 1978?
I do not think it is quite true to say that only three months' notice was given. After all, the recommendation was made by the syllabus committee in 1974 and the syllabus committee contains representatives of all the relevant bodies with the excepttion, of course, of the students who are not directly represented and they were aware of the recommendation and of its acceptance in 1974. This was examined for the first time in 1976, which is a lapse in time of two years.
The Parliamentary Secretary will accept that, if the universities will not do the right thing, he has the power to change the situation back?
Of course, there is no absolute guarantee of the attitude of the universities to any particular form of leaving certificate. The Minister's view is that the common level paper which was recommended as appropriate by the syllabus committee, upon which, incidentally, university representatives sit, should be accepted at its proper value by the university authorities and it is towards that end that he is now working. The contingent situation envisaged by the Senator is based on the failure of the efforts which the Minister has now in hands at this end and it would be premature at this stage to indicate what would happen if they fail. It is hoped that they will not fail.
I hope the Minister has not a closed mind on that.
The Seanad adjourned at 8.45 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 8th December, 1976.