The Leaving Certificate is detroying our education system by creating a cynical approach to learning. We should be afraid, very afraid, writes English teacher Joe Coy.

The Leaving Certificate examination, as presently organised, is undermining the educational system it purports to measure. Over the years the Department of Education and Science has been very prescriptive about what should be taught in second-level schools.

Consequently, most subjects have a broad and comprehensive curriculum. Combined together, these subjects are intended to educate young people in the wonders of language, numbers and a wide range of practical and cultural skills.

The ultimate purpose is to produce well-read, knowledgable and open-minded individuals who, at 17 or 18, can face the world of work or further education. With conscientious teachers, such students can emerge as truly rounded people.

At the end of the senior cycle, the final exams are supposed to give students credit for their achievements. The best students, in terms of intelligence and application, get the As and the less able get the Cs and Ds. However, in reality, this does not always follow.

A recent interview with Ruth Borland (Education Today, September 20th) shed some interesting light on this topic. Ruth, who is a bright and ambitious young woman, got maximum points in her Leaving Cert this year.

In the course of her interview with Louise Holden, she revealed that for the past two years her entire attention was focused on getting maximum points in the exam. She realised that "doing well in the Leaving Cert is about learning the formula for each exam and practising it endlessly". This often meant learning off the sample answers that were provided by examiners. She was frustrated by teachers who introduced material that was not strictly relevant to the exam. The line that provided the heading for this feature expressed her opinion that "there's no point in knowing about stuff that's not going to come up in exams."

The main flaw with the present exam is that many of the questions are predictable. For this reason it is easy to "skeletonise" subjects. The grind schools specialise in this filleting of courses, when they reduce everything to the bare essentials. What's left is then formulated in sample answers to be rote-learned. Instead of opening the minds of teenagers to the exciting world of knowledge, this approach closes minds and reduces everything to sterile formulae.

Unfortunately this cynical approach to learning, which is the raison d'être of the grind school, is permeating mainstream schools. In English, for example, the Department requires teachers to teach eight poets or a total of 48 poems. Now, included among this list there are generally a couple of female poets and three Irish poets. Thanks to the predictable nature of the exam paper, you can almost guarantee that one of the females or one of the Irish poets will come up. Nothing is written about this "understanding", but it would be a brave Exam Commission that would ignore it.

My students, naturally, ask why they can't just study the female or the Irish poets instead of "wasting our time" on all eight poets. Apart from the fact that I believe in the intrinsic value of poetry, I feel it is my duty to carry out the requirements of the curriculum. But am I really wasting their time, time they could use to learn off formulaic notes à la the grind schools? Am I, in fact, handing the advantage to the grind school students and handicapping my own as a consequence?

Ruth's change of school from the public to the private sector is also interesting because it is happening elsewhere.

Some of the brighter, more motivated students are leaving the public sector because they feel that the comprehensive type of education found there may deprive them of points. They don't want to waste their time at non-exam subjects such as religion or physical education.

A new inequality has entered our supposedly egalitarian system where students of less academic ability, coached in the grind schools, leapfrog their betters in the points race because their parents' money or geographical location gives them an unfair advantage.

It would be interesting to look at the fortunes of those who went to third-level through the grind system as opposed to those who went through the State system. What sort of people will our next generation of doctors, lawyers, engineers and professional classes be if they are the products of the narrowly-focused grind system? Will the only "stuff" they are concerned about be money and how to accumulate it?

A meritocracy, like a democracy, needs to be watched over and protected. There are always vested interests that want to skew it in their favour. The current operation of the exam system is undermining what, up to recently, has been an open and fair system that allowed the best and brightest in the country get what they deserve.

Joe Coy is a former ASTI subject representatve. He teaches English in Glenamaddy Community School, Co Galway.

The new grinds culture

A key gathering of school principals last week heard that more than two-thirds of all Leaving Cert students are now taking grinds. In some schools, teachers say the figure is up to 90 per cent.

Figures compiled by the study-skills group Student Enrichment Services reveal that the grinds culture has now even trickled down to first-year students. According to their figures, more than one-in-four 12- and 13-year-olds are taking private grinds.

The boom has been good news for the grind schools. The largest, the Institute of Education in Dublin's Lesson Street, is thought to generate about €9 million per year.

The institute says its fifth- and sixth-year colleges, which provide full-time tuition for students, are not "grind-schools". The schools also offer a limited range of sports and other facilities but the main focus is, unapologetically, on CAO points.

Grind schools are also booming outside of Dublin. Yeats College in Sligo, the Limerick Tutorial Centre and Bruce College in Cork are increasingly popular with students.

All of these schools specialise in distributing study notes to students. There is also a great emphasis on what is likely to come up in the exam paper, with past papers under close scrutiny.