Sir, – Finn McRedmond’s praise for the generalist Leaving Certificate ignores what students experience daily in our schools. (“The Leaving Cert is dense, demanding and far superior to the UK’s A-levels,” June 4th).
In more than 25 years as a secondary school principal and career guidance counsellor, I have seen students do best when they can choose subjects that suit their interests, strengths and ambitions, rather than being constrained by a narrow view of education.
A broad education is important, especially in the early years of school. By senior cycle, however, many students are ready to build on their strengths. After junior cycle and transition year, most have a clear sense of their abilities and interests. Yet the Leaving Certificate often restricts rather than supports that progress.
Why should a student with a strong aptitude for science be unable to study, for example ohysics, chemistry, biology and computer science because of timetabling, subject blocks, or compulsory Irish and English?
RM Block
Why should students have to take three languages to meet college entry requirements when other subjects would better support their future study and careers?
The Leaving Certificate requirement to study Irish is the clearest example. Students who value the language should be encouraged to engage with it more deeply through Irish culture, literature and heritage. That would promote real proficiency and appreciation.
Instead, thousands must study Irish to exam level despite having little interest in it. This benefits neither the language nor the student.
We should also consider the pressure created by an exam system that pushes students into subjects they do not enjoy and burdens them with multiple papers for the same subject, oral and aural exams.
Senior-cycle education should not force every student into the same academic model. It should help young people identify and develop their strengths.
Students who study subjects they enjoy are more likely to succeed, move into the right college course or apprenticeship, and make a stronger contribution to society.
Before celebrating the Leaving Certificate as a model of general education, we should ask students what they want. In my experience, they value the freedom to pursue the subjects that interest them most and best prepare them for the future they hope to build. – Yours, etc,
MICHEÁL LANDERS,
Belgooly,
Co Cork.
Sir, – It being 51 years since I sat the Leaving Cert, idle curiosity led me to look at the 2026 schedule. I had to sit down when I saw the breadth of topics one can study compared to 1975. If only I had those choices back then, there would have been so many other subjects I could have failed. – Yours, etc.
HUGH McDONNELL,
Glasnevin,
Dublin 9.
Sir, -Finn McRedmond’s recent ode to the Leaving Cert brought a wry smile.
I obtained A-levels in English, Irish and history a couple of years before I moved to Dublin in 1990. Not once during the 36 years that I have lived in the land of the Leaving Cert have I considered it to be a better system than A-levels.
The premise that those with a Leaving Cert education have a better general understanding of the world and are more affable than us poor souls who did A-levels has not been my experience. But then, perhaps I’m just applying the narrow specialised view of life that the non-Leaving Cert student is forced to articulate.
Only once have I wished that I instead did the Leaving Cert. It was last year, when my wife – a Tyrone woman – and I were discussing studying techniques with our eldest child, who was soon to start his exams.
“What would you know?” he said. “Neither of you did the Leaving Cert.”
I think it may have been his best answer of the entire exam season. – Yours, etc,
PAUL O’KANE,
Clontarf,
Dublin.
Sir, – I must take issue with the seemingly unequivocal statement from Finn McRedmond that the Leaving Certificate is “far superior to the UK’s A-levels”.
What is missing in this analysis is the reality that both exams are, for the most part, intended to prepare a student for a third-level education and university.
As someone who graduated from university here in the Republic, after completing A-levels in Northern Ireland, I was immediately struck by the fact that many of my fellow students were unable to take on a critical and analytical approach to their chosen subjects, which was now required from them.
At second level in the UK, most students enjoy the undoubted benefits of generalisation for up to five years. This is followed by two years of a focused learning experience, geared to prepare them for university and a career.
After five long years of becoming proficient in vocabularies, the burden of rote learning is consigned to history.
Students are then relieved to be able to settle down to a more concentrated study plan for particular subjects which they enjoy and, which hopefully, prepares them for a specific career.
For my part, the occasional exam dream always involves the intense demands of my A-level course but tempered by the fact that I was well prepared to enjoy the experience of university life. – Yours, etc,
MARTIN McDONALD,
Terenure,
Dublin 12.
