Easter revision courses, secondary school additions, a students’ side business. Ultra concentrated, distilled versions of coursework, further detail than the classroom can provide. The prevalence of subject grinds – referred to as “shadow education” – is only increasing year on year.
Whether driven by the need for greater points, parental pressure, or personal pride, the need to obtain the top grade in the Leaving Cert brings with it a heavy weight; a pressure on a student already trying to balance seven, eight, or at times nine subjects in their exams.
Enter the phenomenon known as grinds.
Promising a structured pathway to the top, students can find comfort in the idea that, with the additional support, they can achieve the coveted 100 points per subject.
Though some non-profit examples of shadow education are present in the Irish landscape, the for-profit market has an estimated value at €60m at second level.
However, although the practice is widely accepted in the modern educational system, the actual effects of shadow education are not as clear cut. In a study carried out by Robin Benz, Marike Dartmouth, and Emer Smyth, the effects of shadow education in Ireland were shown to have varied greatly when analysed in the context of students’ socio-economic positions, and, somewhat unsurprisingly, created a greater chasm between those from a wealthier background.
However, the results revealed that the actual impact of grinds on already high-achieving students’ grades is less than one might assume – with RTÉ going so far as to say that “some families may be wasting their money paying for grinds for their children”.
As outlined by the research: “shadow education does not secure an advantage for Irish students whose lower secondary grades were in the highest quintile”. While shadow education helps lower-performing students to achieve higher grades, in contrast “high-performing students do not benefit from participating in shadow education”.
The analysis, providing a comparative view of shadow education between Ireland and Germany, also calls into question why the practice has taken such a strong hold over the Irish education system. One may conclude that the need for this additional schooling to help a student reach the highest possible grade reveals a failure of the traditional education system, which is viewed as “insufficient” for many students aiming for high courses.
Published by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), the findings reveal that 55% of Irish students in their final year of school use shadow education to supplement their studies, with participation more likely amongst female students.
The varied success of shadow education calls into question the commercialisation of the practice – with many students seeing little impact in their overall performance, it leads one to wonder whether or not the practice preys on student insecurity.
In a separate study published in March of 2024, Selina McCoy and Delma Byrne highlight the danger of social stratification as a consequence of shadow education.
The effects of the practice are far from clear – just as student performance differs from year to year, so too does the impact of shadow education. However, the study notes that “evidence suggests that shadow education is a key determinant of higher education entry in Ireland”, therefore establishing a quantifiable difference for those who do and do not partake, and those who find their desired place in third-level education.
The pair note that shadow education poses particular challenges for policymakers across the world. However, analysing this research with the knowledge that the results of shadow education doesn’t benefit higher achieving students to the extent we might think it does once again calls into question the exploitation, even unintentionally, of student anxiety over their grades.
Student anxiety is inevitable; the sheer volume of information necessary for students to digest and regurgitate during the leaving cert necessitates a precise approach – one often unattainable in the classroom.
This point is noted by McCoy and Byrne, who, having gathered focus groups of students for analysis, quote their direct experience.
Quoting one such student, they highlight that this feeling is most prevalent in maths, which seems to take up “the work of two subjects”. With students in pursuit of higher points courses desperately fighting for the extra 25 points that higher level maths provides, there is no scope for any course material to be neglected.
In their discussion of the subject matter, the pair note that “shadow education is much less about pupils who are in real need gaining support that they cannot find at school, and much more about maintaining the competitive advantages within school for the already successful and privileged”.
The Irish third-level educational landscape would leave anybody grasping for some semblance of control. This is true now more than ever, with inflated grades and random selection throwing a new sense of unpredictability into the ring. However, despite its seemingly good intentions, shadow education does not provide the kind of support which many assume it does.
Aside from subjects which leave students drowning in unexplained coursework, such as maths, there appears to be little inherent need to seek out grinds if a student’s grades are consistently high.
The problem is one to be approached with nuance, of course – distilled notes and concise questions are undeniably very helpful for an exam that seems to pride itself on rote learning.
However, in truth, it is likely that many students simply don’t need the added monetary and social cost of engaging in shadow education. They should try to resist the comforting lull of its embrace and realise that the skills they need can be found elsewhere.
