In 1916, Pádraig Pearse defined education in Ireland as a "murder machine" (Pearse 1916, p.9). While some
would advocate that good progress has been made in education, terminal examinations that dominate the
system have ensured that the system has remained technicised and performative (Hennessy et al. 2011).
This technicist approach was compared, over one hundred years ago by Padraig Pearse (1916) to a machine
obeying “immutable and predetermined laws;...devoid of understanding, of sympathy, of imagination” (p.
11-12). The stultifying uniformity of the state controlled examination system (Atkinson 1967) was
illuminated by Pearse (1916) when he wrote, "precisely the same text-books [are] being read tonight in
every secondary school and college in Ireland" (p.34). Pearse eloquently admonished the competitive state
examinations, "down with it, down among the dead men. Let it promote competitive examinations in the
underworld, if it will" (ibid, p.48). This examination system has become even more prescribed since Pearse
first wrote these words, with subject syllabi remaining narrow and conducive to a factual rather than a
holistic approach to learning (Hennessy et al. 2011). Two prominent values that pervade this economically
driven approach to curriculum are performativity and competition. If these are given priority without
carefully balancing them with less egocentric values, many serious consequences can occur that are
deleterious to health and well-being (Trant 2007). Therefore, the consequences of current curriculum
paradigms, as they stand, are potentially very serious.
As a result of the dominance of the terminal exam, health education has become marginalised in schools.
The tendency for teachers to teach to the exam and teach students ‘what’ to think as opposed to ‘how’
to think has been a problematic consequence of the central position exams are given in our schools. In
effect, the space to develop critical thinking and the broader liberal education agenda has become
marginalised. Such deterministic education is contrary to the values of health education, resulting in
divergent agendas competing for space on the school timetable (Mannix McNamara 2012).
According to the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) in Ireland,
The general aim of education is to contribute towards the development of all aspects of the individual,
including the aesthetic, creative, cultural, emotional, intellectual, moral, physical, political, religious, social
and spiritual development, for personal and family life, for living in the community, and for leisure. (NCCA 2012, p.1)
However, critics of the Irish education system argue that education as a process has become eclipsed in
favour of means-end technicism, where schooling terminates in examination, to feed the needs of industry
and business (O’Brien 2008). The rhetoric of education policy is admirable in its emphasis on student
centred approaches to learning. However, a critical analysis of the practice of education tells a different
story. The rhetoric is often sacrificed in favour of standardisation and performativity.
In this context it is particularly difficult for a health curriculum to make significant inroads embedding
itself into school practice. Those involved in the development of policy for the Irish education system need
to pay attention to the cautionary proviso that lack of attention to affective development results in
negation of the provision of a holistic education, leading to a compromised vision of democratic education
(LeBlanc et al. 2009). There is currently unbalanced and harmful overemphasis on academic measurable
outcomes to the neglect of the other elements that are necessary for participation in a humane and
democratic society. Such reductionism poses significant challenges for the teacher of Social, Personal and
Health Education (SPHE).