Towards a Better Future

Chapter Three: Curriculum
country before the full curriculum was finalised and approved by the Minister. The 1971 curriculum
was radically different from its predecessor, in terms of its philosophy, content and methodology. It
provided a wide range of subjects and emphasised guided discovery learning methods. There was a
greater focus on the Arts; Social, Environmental and Scientific Education, and Physical Education
than had been the case in previous curricula. Flexibility was given to schools and teachers in the
choice and balance of subjects and teaching approaches, and school-based curriculum planning was
introduced (Department of Education, 1971). The aims of the 1971 curriculum were summarised
as follows:
■
■
To enable the child to lead a full life as a child
To equip the child to avail of further education, to go on to live a full and useful life as an
adult in society.
The curriculum was based on a philosophy of education that incorporated the following five
principles:
■
■
■
■
■
The full and harmonious development of the child
The importance of making due allowance for individual difference
The importance of activity and discovery methods
The integrated nature of the curriculum
The importance of environment-based learning.
The integrated nature of the curriculum was spelled out in Chapter II of the Teachers’ Handbook
- The Structure of the Curriculum. The integration of the curriculum was seen ‘in the religious and
civic spirit which animates its parts’ and the Handbook stated that ‘the separation of religious and
secular instruction into differentiated subject compartments serves only to throw the whole
educational function out of focus’. This emphasis on the integration of religious and secular
instruction was to become controversial in subsequent years, but simply gave substance to Rule 68
of the Rules for National Schools (1965) which stated ‘Of all parts of a school curriculum Religious
Instruction is by far the most important …. Religious instruction is …. a fundamental part of the
school course, and a religious spirit should inform and vivify the whole work of the school’
(Department of Education, 1965).
It is notable, however, that no effort was made in drafting the 1971 curriculum to ensure continuity
between the primary and secondary school. If anything, the gap between the learning experience
of pupils at primary and secondary level was widened by the introduction of the new primary
curriculum, which emphasised a child-centred approach as opposed to a rigid exam-based
curriculum at second level. During the consultation period prior to the introduction of the new
curriculum in 1971, this anomaly was pointed out in a submission from the Teachers’ Study Group,
but to no effect (Coolahan, 2016).
— 25 —