This article critically examines the relationship between recent educational policy and the advancement of second-level subject hierarchies in Ireland. The paradox of promoting an individual subject by means of the matriculation system, while also calling for a broad and balanced curriculum, is questioned. The apparent retreat from a commitment to comprehensive education is discussed with respect to a neo-liberal agenda in education and a modernist-vocational ideology of curriculum development. The article concludes with a discussion on the place of subject-based curricula and a call for more balanced debate around educational policy, which may result in the promotion of subject boundaries.
Ben-AriM. (2012). Mathematical logic for computer science. New York, NY: Springer.
2.
BernsteinB. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In YoungM. (Ed.), Knowledge and control (pp. 47-69). London, England: Collier Macmillan.
3.
BernsteinB. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.
4.
Bonel-ElliottI. (1994). Lessons from the sixties: Reviewing Dr. Hillery’s educational reform. Irish Educational Studies, 13, 32-45.
5.
BourdieuP. (2000). Reproduction: In education, society and culture. London, England: Sage.
6.
BourguignonJ.-P. (2002). Mathematics and other subjects. In HoltonD.ArtigueM.KirchgräberU.HillelJ.NissM.SchoenfeldA. (Eds.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level (pp. 313-320). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
7.
BoyleB.BraggJ. (2006). A curriculum without foundation. British Educational Research Journal, 32, 569-582.
8.
CarrD. (1996). The dichotomy of liberal versus vocational education: Some basic conceptual geography. In NiemanA. (Ed.), Philosophy of education 1995 (pp. 53-63). Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education Society.
9.
CarrD. (2003). Making sense of education: An introduction to the philosophy and theory of education and teaching. London, England: RoutledgeFalmer.
10.
CarrW. (1998). The curriculum in and for a democratic society. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 6, 323-340.
11.
CarrW. (2006). Education without theory. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 136-159.
12.
ClaxtonG. (2009). What’s the point of school? Rediscovering the heart of education. Oxford, UK: Oneworld Publications.
13.
CockroftW. (1982). Mathematics counts: Report of the committee of inquiry into the teaching of mathematics in schools. London, England: Department of Education and Science/Welsh Office, Her Majesty Stationery Office.
14.
CrawfordK.GordonS.NicholasJ.ProsserM. (1994). Conceptions of mathematics and how it is learned: The perspectives of students entering university. Learning and Instruction, 4, 331-345.
15.
Curriculum and Examinations Board. (1986). In our schools: A framework for curriculum and assessment. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
16.
DarbyL. (2008). Negotiating mathematics and science school subject boundaries: The role of aesthetic understanding. In ThomaseM. V. (Ed.), Science education in focus (pp. 225-251). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
17.
DaviesB. (2003). Death to critique and dissent? The policies and practices of new managerialism and of “evidence-based practice.”Gender and Education, 15, 91-103.
18.
DaviesM.EdwardsG. (1999). Will the curriculum caterpillar ever learn to fly?Cambridge Journal of Education, 29, 265-275.
19.
DaviesP. B.BanselP. (2007). Neoliberalism and education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20, 247-259.
20.
De ManP. (1982). The resistance to theory. Yale French Studies, 63, 3-20.
21.
Department of Education and Skills. (2011). National strategy for higher education to 2030. Dublin, Ireland: Government Publication.
22.
Department of Education and Skills. (2012). A framework for junior cycle. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
23.
DeweyJ. (2004). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
24.
EisnerE. W. (1992, September14-19). The role of education in the cultural and artistic development of the individual. Paper presented at the UNESCO International Conference on Education, 43rd Session, Geneva, Switzerland.
25.
European Commission. (2012). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe 2012. Brussels, Belgium: Education, Audiovisual, and Culture Executive Agency.
26.
Expert Group on Future Skills Needs. (2007). Mandate of the Expert Group on Future Skills Needs for the period 2007 to 2009 as agreed by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for Education and Science. Dublin, Ireland: Author. Retrieved from http://www.skillsireland.ie/media/egfsn_mandate_2007.pdf
27.
Expert Group on Future Skills Needs. (2008). Statement on raising national mathematical achievement. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
28.
Expert Group on Future Skills Needs. (2009). The Expert Group on Future Skills Needs statement of activity 2008. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
29.
Expert Group on Future Skills Needs. (2011). The Expert Group on Future Skills Needs statement of activity 2010. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
30.
GillO.O’DonoghueJ.FaulknerF.HanniganA. (2010). Trends in performance of science and technology students (1997-2008) in Ireland. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 41, 323-339.
31.
GilliesD. (2006). A curriculum for excellence: A question of values. Scottish Educational Review, 38, 25-36.
32.
GoodsonI. (1983). Subjects for study: Aspects of a social history of curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 15, 391-408.
33.
GoodsonI. (2011). Subjects for study: Towards a social history of curriculum. In GoodsonI.BallS. (Eds.), Defining the curriculum: Histories and ethnographies of school subjects (pp. 25-45). London, England: Routledge.
34.
GuayR. B.McDanielE. D. (1977). The relationship between mathematics achievement and spatial abilities among elementary school children. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8, 211-215.
35.
HargreavesD. H. (1988). The challenge for the comprehensive school: Culture, curriculum and community. New York, NY: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
36.
HarlandJ.KinderK.LordP.StottA.SchagenI.HaynesJ.. . .PaolaR. (2000). Arts education in secondary schools: Effects and effectiveness. Slough, Berkshire, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.
37.
HennessyJ.McNamaraP. M. (2011). Packaging poetry? Pupils’ perspectives of their learning experience within the post-primary poetry classroom. English in Education, 45, 206-223.
38.
HillD. (2004). Books, banks and bullets: Controlling our minds—The global project of imperialistic and militaristic neo-liberalism and its effect on education policy. Policy Futures in Education, 2, 504-522.
39.
HillD. (2007). Critical teacher education, new labour, and the global project of neoliberal capital. Policy Futures in Education, 5, 204-225.
40.
HoltM. (1999). Recovering the comprehensive ideal. Teacher Development, 3, 329-340.
41.
HylandÁ. (2011). Entry to higher education in Ireland in the 21st century. Dublin, Ireland: National Council for Curriculum and Assessment.
42.
Innovation Ireland. (2010). Report of the innovation taskforce. Dublin, Ireland: Stationery Office.
Irish Universities Association. (2012). Reform of selection and entry to university in the context of national educational policy. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
45.
JablonkaE. (2003). Mathematical literacy. In BishopA. J.ClementsM. A.KeitelC.LeungF. K. S. (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 75-102). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
46.
KohlhaseM. (2006). OMDoc—An open markup format for mathematical documents [Version 1.2]. Bremen, Germany: Springer.
47.
LawN.ChowA.YuenA. H. (2005). Methodological approaches to comparing pedagogical innovations using technology. Education and Information Technologies, 10(1-2), 7-20.
48.
LawtonD. (2012). Class, culture and the curriculum. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
49.
LewisW. A. (2003). Theory of economic growth. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
50.
LinderS. M.Powers-CostelloB.StegelinD. A. (2011). Mathematics in early childhood: Research-based rationale and practical strategies. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39, 29-37.
51.
LynchK. (2006). Neo-liberalism and marketisation: The implications for higher education. European Educational Research Journal, 5, 1-17.
52.
MalloyC. (2002). Democratic access to mathematics through democratic education: An introduction. In EnglishL. D. (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education: Directions for the 21st century (pp. 17-25). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
53.
MancosuP. (2011). The philosophy of mathematical practice. Oxford, UK: OxfordUniversity Press.
54.
McKernanJ. (1991). Reconceptualizing the post-primary curriculum: A grid-matrix for the design and evaluation of a core curriculum. Irish Educational Studies, 10, 188-204.
55.
MeltzerD. E. (2002). The relationship between mathematics preparation and conceptual learning gains in physics: A possible “hidden variable” in diagnostic pretest scores. American Journal of Physics, 70, Article 1259.
56.
MollmanS. K. (1992). The gender gap: Separating the sexes in public education. Indiana Law Journal, 68, 149-176.
57.
MooreA. (2012). Teaching and learning: Pedagogy, curriculum and culture. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
58.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2005). Review of mathematics in post-primary education: Discussion paper. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
59.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2007). ESRI research into the experiences of students in the third year of junior cycle and in transition to senior cycle: Summary and commentary. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
60.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2009). Towards learning: An overview of senior cycle education. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
61.
OlaniyanD.OkemakindeT. (2008). Human capital theory: Implications for educational development. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 479-483.
62.
OlssenM.PetersM. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20, 313-345.
63.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2009). Creative effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris, France: Author.
64.
PaisA.StentoftD.ValeroP. (2010). From questions of how to questions of why in mathematics education research. Paper presented at the Sixth International Mathematics Education and Society Conference, Berlin, Germany.
65.
PerryW. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
66.
PetersM. (2001). National education policy constructions of the “knowledge economy”: Towards a critique. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 2(1), 1-22.
67.
PredigerS. (2007). Philosophical reflections in mathematics classrooms. In FrancoisK.Van BendegemJ. P. (Eds.), Philosophical dimensions in mathematics education (pp. 43-58). New York, NY: Springer.
68.
ReadH. (1943). Education through art. London, England: Faber and Faber.
69.
ReynaV. F.BrainerdC. J. (2007). The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: Numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 147-159.
70.
RobinsonK. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. Chichester, UK: Capstone.
SchmidtW. H. (2012). At the precipice: The story of mathematics education in the United States. Peabody Journal of Education, 87, 133-156.
73.
SextonS. S. (2011). Transformative praxis in teacher practice: One tauira finds her place in education. Compare, 41, 59-74.
74.
SfardA. (1998). The many faces of mathematics: Do mathematicians and researchers in mathematics education speak about the same thing? In SierpinskaA.KilpatrickJ. (Ed.), Mathematics education as a research domain: A search for identity (pp. 491-511). New York, NY: Springer.
75.
SinghK.GranvilleM.DikaS. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95, 323-332.
76.
SmithA. (2004). Making mathematics count: The report of Professor Adrian Smith’s inquiry into post-14 mathematics education. London, England: Department for Education and Skills.
77.
SmythE.BanksJ.CalvertE. (2011). From Leaving certificate to leaving school: A longitudinal study of sixth year students. Dublin, Ireland: Liffey Press in Association With the Economic and Social Research Institute.
78.
SmythE.CalvertE. (2011). Choices and challenges: Moving from junior cycle to senior cycle education. Dublin, Ireland: Liffey Press in Association With the Economic and Social Research Institute.
79.
State Examinations Commission. (2005). Chief examiner’s report on the leaving certificate mathematics examination 2005: Higher, ordinary and foundation levels. Dublin, Ireland: Author.
StenhouseL. (1968). The humanities curriculum project. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1, 26-33.
82.
StenhouseL. (1971). The humanities curriculum project: The rationale. Theory Into Practice, 10, 154-162.
83.
StenhouseL. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London, England: Heinemann Educational Publishers.
84.
StevensP. A.VermeerschH. (2010). Streaming in Flemish secondary schools: Exploring teachers’ perceptions of and adaptations to students in different streams. Oxford Review of Education, 36, 267-284.
85.
TressB.TressG.FryG. (2006). Defining concepts and the process of knowledge production in integrative research. In TressB.TressG.FryG.OpdamP. (Eds.), From landscape research to landscape planning: Aspects of integration, education and application (pp. 13-26). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
86.
WiliamD. (2001). What is wrong with our educational assessment and what can be done about it?Educational Review, 15(1), 57-62.
87.
WoodrowD. (2003). Mathematics, mathematics education and economic conditions. In BishopA. J.ClementsM. A.KeitelC.LeungF. K. S. (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 9-30). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
88.
WragaW. G. (1999). Repudiation, reinvention, and educational reform: The comprehensive high school in historical perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 292-304.
89.
YoungM. (1975). An approach to the study of curricula as socially organized knowledge. In GolbyM.GreenwaldJ.WestR. (Eds.), Curriculum design (pp. 100-127). London, England: The Open University.
