By Kenneth Henry
When the Leaving Cert results were released in August, it emerged that almost a quarter of students who sat the exams were granted an Irish exemption. The record number of students with an exemption has drawn significant criticism from many quarters, with the General Secretary of Conradh na Gaeilge describing it as a ‘crisis point’.
The rising number of exemptions is prompting many advocates of the Irish Language and an Oireachtas committee to call for a total removal of the exemption system, with the exception of ‘rare and exceptional cases’.
Many of those who support such reforms have valid concerns over the current state of the Irish language, with only a tiny proportion of the population utilising the language after they finish school. Additionally, the exemption system has many problems. The number of students with exemptions is significantly higher than the approximately 10% of the population with dyslexia or similar learning disabilities.
Despite the legitimate concerns that exist with the system, getting rid of the exemptions would be a disaster for students who suffer from dyslexia. Those of us with Dyslexia are all too aware of difficulties in school and the lack of support available to us. Our few supports are a lifeline that helps us access college, further education, training, etc. One of those is the Irish exemption; the exemption ensures that you do not need to worry about reaching the O6 grade in Irish at leaving cert, which is generally required for entry to NUI college courses. Without this exemption, there is no doubt that many more students with dyslexia would greatly struggle or be unable to access their college courses, and the social and potential economic effects that would result in locking a cohort of people out of university would be devastating. These possible implications seem to not to be recognised by those calling to remove the exemption, or perhaps it doesn’t concern them. I don’t know what’s worse.
Those who call for removing the exemptions commonly argue that changing how Irish is taught in school will solve the problem, and there will be no need for an exemption. This so-called solution would mean students with learning difficulties should take an oral exam only, as opposed to both an oral and written exam. This, of course, is oversimplified utter nonsense. The way Dyslexia affects one’s ability to learn a language is very complex. While it is true that teaching strategies can mitigate the impact of dyslexia, just doing an oral exam is not one of them; these strategies are much more complex than this. Unsurprisingly, such methods have not been proposed by those who want to remove the exemption.
Nevertheless, the most significant factor that impacts dyslexic students’ ability to learn a language is the severity of the disability. How dyslexia affects the ability to learn a language is generally a result of weakness in decoding, which is translating the sounds in words, encoding (spelling), and phonological awareness (the ability to hear and manipulate the sound in a language). This, as a result, dramatically hinders one’s ability to learn a language and puts students with dyslexia at an inherent disadvantage, irrespective of the way the language is taught.
The exemption system has many problems, and there is little doubt that many reforms are needed. However, the removal of the exemption is not one of them; despite the high number of students who are granted an exemption, the vast majority of students still study Irish, and the majority of them don’t utilise the language; that is where the focus should be, not the 10% of students with a learning disability.
Removal of the exemption would exacerbate the disadvantages that people with dyslexia already face. A significant pushback is required against these calls to remove the exemption, be it from those of us who have dyslexia, families, the Dyslexia Association or politicians. We are finally seeing a greater understanding and more robust support for students with learning disabilities; we can’t let this be undone by parochialism.