THE UNIVERSITY SENATE.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 16, 18 January 1913, Page 11

THE UNIVERSITY SENATE.

SESSION , IN AUCKLAND. ADDDESS BT THE CHAXCEIXOB. AX INTERESTING REVIEW. The Chancellor of the University of New Zealand (Sir Robert Stout) this morning delivered the annual addrese to the Senate, which is holding its session this year in Auckland. In the course of his address Sir- Robert dealt with several matters of vital importance to the work of the University, and these will be the subject of earnest consideration by the Senate during the next -week or two. Eeferring to the conference of the British Universities held in London last year when the New Zealand University was represented by Professor Chilton, the Rev. Mr. Evans, and Mr. Joynt, the Chancellor said that it was interesting to note that, though amongst some of our professors the question of the examination of students loomed large, that question did not seem even to have been mentioned in the Congress. It was well known, he re-

marked, that in the oldest English universities the teachers of the students were not their examiners, and in the newer universities there were always some external examiners. The Congress did not appear to consider that the system pursued in England was any hindrance to university work. It was noted that Parliament at its last session had passed an Act authorising the Senate to confer a diploma of public health after examination, or to confer it on those who had obtained it in some ot&—. university. Regulations would have to he framed so that tie powers conferred on the Senate might be made effective. The Chancellor remarked that he was glad to be able .to state that the Legislature had made such an alteration in the law as would permit professors, teachers, and other officers in our university and its colleges to obtain the, benefits of the superannuation scheme in the Public Service Superannuation Act. CAPPING <-*EREMO*STES. Capping ceremonies were conducted in the four.university towns during the past year, the Chancellor himself being able to preside at the Auckland ceremony. There was some disturbance created by a few of the stndents towards the close of the meeting. The students as a whole took no part in the disturbance. Sir •Robert, comment—g on the incident, remarked: "I desire to-say that hitherto I have found the Auckland students most exemplary in their conduct at capping ceremonies. There has no doubt grown up in connection with the university functions a notion that the students have a right to intemrpt the • speakers, and that courtesy, does not demand from them seemly behaviour at capping ceremonies. Other universities in . Australasia have. I am informed, had great trouble in keeping order at their public functions. I note that lately at an oratorical contest at Victoria College tliere was the same lack of courtesy displayed. The blame for such a state of things rests not wholly on the students. In toy opinion the university did not insist as it should have ddne. 'when the disturbances first began, on proper decorum being observed. It is useless to have public functions if no speaker can be. assured that he will have a hearing. If the capping ceremony is to be continued some regulations should be .passed penalising those students who commit'tbesS'breaches of decorum.'' THE PROFESSORIAL CONFERENCE. , A Professor—l Conference was held in

Wellington from the 19th to tbe 22nd November, 1912. The delegates chosen by the lespective Professorial Boards did not seem to the Chancellor to have been fairly representative of the Arts Faculty. Fourteen delegates represented classics— English, Modern Language, Economics, History and Mental Science. There were 1,921" "students studying these subjects, so there was one delegate to 137 students, whilst in Science; viz., in- Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics, Botany, Zoology and Geology, -16 delegates represented 923 students, or one delegate to 58 students. Education and Law were both unrepresented. It would be well, the Chancellor observed, to remember this when the report was considered. He went on to say that he thought it his duty to bring before the Senate certain matters connected with this report Unlike the report of the previous conference, no accotmt was given of the voting, and it would be assumed that the delegates were of one mind. He had, however, been informed that such was not the case. The conference was held in secret; Press representatives were not admitted. "AN ARCHAIC SYLLABUS." The. subjects specially remitted by the Senate were: —(a) Courses for B.A. and B-Sc. degrees and essentially connected subjects; and (b) the best method of "giving a permanent shape to the conferenceIt would be seen that so far as the subject marked (a) was concerned the alterations suggested in the existing statutes were trivial. It was represented by some -professors, "who called themselves reformers," that the syllabus was archaic. The changes suggested showed that the conference treated that criticism with contempt. The conference recom—ended that the de<Tee of Bachelor of Science be abolished; that it was a peculiar method of selecting a course for the degree. It was true that tbe report stated that the conference had to consider in the future tne creation of a new degree in Science; but, judging from tie little said about it, one°would infer that it was not to be ' a general Science Degree, but one of a technical character —that is, connected ' with agriculture, manufactures, and ' other such pursuits, "WHAT'S IN A NAME V . j Under our existing system, continued • the Chancellor, we have two primary de- < grees, B.A. and B.Sc. In the B.A. degree , I—tin, or Greek is compuisory. In the . B.Sc. degree four Science subjects are : compulsory— matbematics, physic— sci- . ence, chemistry, botany, or in lieu of • botany, zoology or geology or physi- . ologv. The conference proposed one de- , gree", hut it was to--be a bifurcated degree, that is, there would be a B__ , degree proper, with only one science sub- . jeofr, arid a BA degree mainly scientific. ••What's in a name? That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet."' In fact, the only change, said the Chance_or, was that, mathematics not being compulsory, a student mi._-.i-. art BA degree for passing such subjects as he would have had to pass in B.Sc., only 'that three ir—tead of fouT sciences were required. This was a slight change to get -rid "of the " archaic ** nature of • the syllabus. It bad taken two years or more of labour and-thought of the reforming professors to discover this wonderful remedy. It -was not stated what was tc become of the M.Sc. degree. If it was given on the present syllahns, the proposed B-A. o_tJ m s being accejrted, a etudeat who ,

got _c M_c degree —o_d know lest science than was required at present. The propos— was really a lowering of 'bhe science requirements. REFERRED TO EXPERTS. The conference bad forwarded ft'pro- ■ posed amendment of the syllabus for _athematics —a change, it seemed ioxthe ChancelloT, more of namee than of substance. He congratulated tbe conference however, on the mode in which it set about dealing with the syllabus in _athematics, and the syllabus in honours in chemistry, both questions having been referred to experts on the subject. Two proposals were made for altering the mathematical syllabus by the University teachers in the subject. the profeasots were divided in opinion. A compro—i-e was afterwards effected, and it _ -this com-promise tbe conference has forwarded to Senate. The syllabus in honours in chemistry was altered by two of the chemical professors. The course the Senate had followed in the past of remitting any proposed alteration of a syllabus -to the teachers of the subject had been followed by the conference, but the teache— in a subject could communicate direct with the Senate without the aid of a professorial conference. VI the talk about professors being 'better able to deal with subjects they do not teach than members of the Senate liad thus 'been proved to be devoid of any solid basis of fact. It must be higmy gratifying to the public to know that this " arch—c " syllabus Tequired alterations of so meticulous a character as conference suggested. WHO SHALL ——_IINE? SOME HUMOROUS DEDUCTIONS. Much time of the conference seems to have been spent on the subject of who were to be examiners. This was a general subject on which the opinions of the Serrate, or of any body of men who had studied educational questions, were of as much value as those of the delegates. The Senate had no power to grant degrees without e—t_ination —the question really was, who were to examine? ine delegates answered by saying the teachers in each subject must examine in that subject, or rather, the " responsible University teachers." Were there, then, University teachers who were not responsible? Did the words mean " professors" only, or were lecturers included ? If lecturers were not included, Chen there might be no examiner in Latin from Otago University, and no examiner in education from Victoria College. Would it include assistant professors? Another suggestion was that no questions were to be set in any paper on a subject until they had been submitted to the teacher of the subject. What did this mean? Suppose a professor objected to a question, was it to be disallowed? Were the

students so ill-equipped for the competition that was the rule in life, that they could not be questioned on a subject they had studied uil their teachers approved of the question ? They might desire to compete in the Indian Civil Service examinations, or in other public examinations, military or civil. Must the examiners first submit the questions to the New Zealand professors? Many of our young men would, the Gt—ncellor hoped, 'be found taking a share in the government of th— r country. He supposed, if they stood for popular election, end were asked to deal with political matte—, such as loans, tariff, taxation, etc, they would be allowed to tell questioners that their questions had not been submitted to the professors. This suggestion about submitting questions to professors must have been made 'by delegates who had little sense of humour. The examinations were for the purpose of ascertaining Whether students have acquired knowledge. The subjects were set and books were named, and periods ou literature and history were prescribed. Why should an examiner who asked a student of Greek to translate a passage from a set book—say from Plato's Apology—'have to submit the passage to the Greek professor? Was a student's knowledge to be of that slender kind in any subject that he must dread an external examiner ? If it was a wrong to a New Zealand student to put a question to him that his professor had not seen, what grievous wrong must not the students of Oxford and Cambridge have undergone during the past centuries! Surely —c teachers of these great Universities had been just as competent as our "responsible University teachers." •TORM AT A ('LANCE." Tn further trenchant criticism of proposed reforms in the method of conducting examinations, the Chancellor said: — "The 'responsible University teachers' are not only, however, to dominato all the examinations', hut there is power to be given to them to recommend students for degrees who have pa—ed no examinations at all. The professors are also to select courses of study for the students, which*, I presume, will include the exempted students. Judging from recent tendencies, I do not know if the late Mr Habens was wrong in insisting on an external student being allowed to get a degree if he could satisfy the external examiners without being called on to pass college examinations. It looks as if some professors desire to abolish the exempted or external students.

"According to the resolutions of the conference the profeesors are not only to —amine their own students, but they are to be associated with the entrance examinations 'without necessarily requiring from them the labour of reading candidates' answers in large nurobe-re.** If it is right that a teacher should examine his own students, it is surely the secondary school teachers who rvhou'd be associated with the entrance examinations. The principle that is to be made applicable to University students is not, however, to be made applicable to secondary school boys and girls. They must be presumed to be able to prove their knowledge by answering questions their teachers have never seen. How a professor can Appreciate the work, or ability, or knowledge of secondary school pupils ■without reading all -the answers given in their papers, I cannot understand. A witty author once said that some reviewers of books, by merely cutting the pages of a treatise with a paper-knife, thought they understood the book. In that case the book is handled at all events, but in the case of the answers of the candidates for scholarships the professors are not expected to undertake even so much labour as that. ALL-POWERFUL PROFESSORS. "The whole trend of the resolutions framed by the conference is to centre all the power and authority of the University _ tbe profete.;r>rP. If thebe resolutions are adopted the S.Z. University mil—t cease to exist, and the four colleges would require to be constituted four separate Urriversi-ies. Those of — who have taken some part ia helpino- to build up the N.Z. University will, if the people desire to destroy the institution wil_lgly yield urp our position. We live in a democracy, and to the will of the people we must bow. I believe it will be an evil day, not only for the Dominion, but for higher education and for the ,-teache*— i_-.«_- cohegea, when the N.Z.

University is abolasbed; we need to preserve every institution that- makes for national life. When I think of the expense we have already incurred, and the time _*we 'have wanted in diecu—ing socalled reform, I begin to wonder § we will ever be able to grapple with the real questions in the higher education that need bur attention. No educational system is perfect any more than any other system devised by human government. In the past, reform has not come from bureaucrats, and I doubt if through them progress will come to us in our University institutions. THE AUSTRALL4.N WAY. "We were told," said the Chancellor in conclusion, "that we should frame oar Federal University on the lines followed in the Unitary University of Sydney. Well, that University had a statute passed a few months ago, and that without the aid of a Royal Corn—ii—ion, and this is what the Parliament of New South Wales has done: It has declared that hereaft— there are to be twentyfour Fellows on the .Senate, the number we have, four appointed by the Govnor,. one elected by the members of c LegisJa.Uve Council, one by the —emirs of the Legislative Assembly, five by the representatives of the teaching staffs, viz., the chaimian of the Professorial Board, and four Fellows elected, one by each of four faculties, ten elected by^the-graduates, and three elected by the Senate. Two, the Hon Sir N. Macla-urin and bis Honor Judge Backhouse, are made in addition Fellows for life. "Formerly the Senate consisted of sixteen elective Felk~s/ and not fewer than three, nor more than six, ex officio Fellows who must be professors. "'The Board of Exarmmers is to comprise not less than eight persons appointed by the Governor, being four officers of the DppTLrt—ent of Public Instruction, and not less than four professors or other teachers of the University nominated by the Senate. Further, the University is compelled to provide for the establish—em and maintemance of

the tutorial clacees in science, economics, ancient and modern history and sociology, and may provide even tutorial classes in other subjects; such classes to be open to non —atriculated rtudente."